On Tue, 18 Aug 2009, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Nicolas Pitre <nico@xxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Tue, 18 Aug 2009, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > >> For git's own use, I would be much happier with this change. > >> > >> But given that there are some people wanting to snarf block-sha1/*.[ch] > >> out to use them standalone, I have a slight hesitation against introducing > >> the dependency to git-compat-util.h, making it unclear to them that all > >> this file wants from outside are ntohl, htonl and memcpy. > > > > Should we really care to keep our code suboptimal just to make it > > readily reusable by other projects? That seems a bit backward to me. > > You are right; and I should give a bit more credit to their intelligence. > The source (block-sha1/sha1.c) is short enough that they can figure this > out for themselves even without any additional comments. Well, I gave in and added a comment to the patch anyway, with more improvements in the case of constant values. Patch follows. > Another issue, especially with your "openssl sha1 removal" patch, is if we > can assume gcc everywhere. As far as I can tell, block-sha1/sha1.c will > be the first unconditional use of inline asm or statement expression on > i386/amd64. Are folks on Solaris and other platforms Ok with this? I guess we can guard the first with ifdef(__GNUC__) which should help people with MSVC. That should take care of x86 at least. Nicolas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html