On Fri, 12 Jan 2001, Justin Carlson wrote:
> I still would rather stick to the switch style of doing things in the future,
> though, because it's a bit more flexible; if you've got companies that fix
> errata without stepping PrID revisions or some such, then the table's going to
> have some strange special cases that don't quite fit.
>
> But this is much more workable than what I *thought* you were proposing. And
> not worth nearly as much trouble as I've been giving you over it.
Then don't use a probe table, but a switch based CPU detection routine that
fills in a table of function pointers. So you need the switch only once.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven ------------- Sony Software Development Center Europe (SDCE)
Geert.Uytterhoeven@sonycom.com ------------------- Sint-Stevens-Woluwestraat 55
Voice +32-2-7248626 Fax +32-2-7262686 ---------------- B-1130 Brussels, Belgium
