18 Sep
2008
18 Sep
'08
4:27 a.m.
Jorge wrote:
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 05:11:08PM +0200, Johannes Hofmann wrote:
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 09:21:45PM +0000, corvid wrote:
Johannes wrote:
but we should also consider to just switch to standard assert(). At the moment I would actually prefer the latter. What do others think?
Standard assert() sounds fine to me.
Ok. Here comes the patch. It also adds a missing check for negative values in SimpleVector methods.
Does this patch show any performance improvement?
If it does and has no portability problems, I'm for it too.
Inlining succeeds now. 8% isn't enough to really notice, but gprof seems consistent with that time being saved. And we should probably rip out fail() as well so that no one ever makes the mistake of using it.