Re: i386 inline-asm string functions - some questions

On Sun, Dec 28, 2003 at 06:22:08PM -0800, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> 
> Meh.  I personally am convinced that the compiler can do a *much*
> better job, and that trying to improve bits/string.h and
> bits/string2.h is a waste of time; in fact, I've felt that they have
> *always* caused the generated code to get worse, from the day they
> were introduced.  I once tried to get Uli to take them out again,
> with hard numbers to back me up, but he ignored me.

Who is Uli - Ulrich Drepper?

> So I have very little interest in pursuing any of your suggestions.

But I don't even try to have you to do so!  I'm just trying to
understand what is/was happening.  I very don't like the content of
bits/string[2].h too.  And I don't want to offend you.  I'm very
sorry, if so.

> If you want to keep at them, though, and come up with patches, feel
> free.

Ok.