On Sun, Dec 08, 2013 at 10:29:53PM +0000, David Holland wrote: > I have done it by having the original, non-_r functions provide a > thunk for the comparison function, as this is least invasive. If we > think this is too expensive, an alternative is generating a union of > function pointers and making tests at the call sites; another option > is to duplicate the code (hopefully with cpp rather than C&P) but that > seems like a bad plan.
I'd prefer to not have another indirect call. The only difference is the definition and expanding a CMP macro differently? Joerg
