Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > You made me curious. I tried to compile both and here is the result on > ARM (I swapped the arguments left and right of the &&): > ...zip... > > Maybe gcc isn't so clever on other architectures, I don't know ;) You're right. Same conclusion on x86 with gcc 4.7. I had tried that a long time ago (maybe 10 years or so) on x86, benchmarking both pure C and Java on this very function (it was for aircrafts timeslots conflicts discovery). At that time, the "startA <= endB && endA >= startB" was fastest. So compilation technique have improved enough to write maintainable code after all :) Cheers. -- Robert _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
