On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 02:17:06PM +0100, degger@xxxxxxx wrote:
> agains 0 for example than against negativeness and this part also plays
> a role when returning 0 or non-null instead of a negative value.
Sorry, but before you continue with all this, ehrm, wrongness, would you
please first check what you are talking about? Can you give us a single
example of such a cpu? No cpu linux runs on has this property, btw.
The reason nobody wants to talk reasonable with you is that most of what
you claim is simply that: wrong. People cannot trust what you say when
they cna trivialy verify most of you claims as wrong. If you would only
give the points that _are_ true, then people will be much more open in
discussing optimizations.
> For example if you shift a signed value it has to generate code to
> take care of the sign and similar with some logic operations.
Again, not on any cpu that linux runs on.
> Trust me, if I see the assembly I can tell you which one is faster and
> by which magnitude.
How can we trust you if most of the easily-verifiable claims of yourself
are simply untrue?
*please* this is not a with-hunt. *please* re-adjust your attitude. when so
many people tell you that you are wrong you could at least check wether tzhis
is true.
--
-----==- |
----==-- _ |
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +--
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / pcg@xxxxxxxx |e|
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+
The choice of a GNU generation |
|
