Re: i386 inline-asm string functions - some questions

Ulrich Drepper <[email protected]> writes:

> Zack Weinberg wrote:
>> I once tried to get Uli to take them out again, with
>> hard numbers to back me up, but he ignored me.
>
> I have absolutely no problem taking out the inlines once gcc is able to
> perform the same optimizations.  Problem is that nobody spent the time
> so far to complete the task in gcc.

This is true - I believe Joseph Myers put a list of yet-to-be-done
optimizations on the GCC projects page ...

> As far as I know each function we still have has an advantage over
> the gcc code.

... however, that advantage is only theoretical.  Experiments such as
Peter Zaitsev's just now, and mine several years ago, demonstrate that
the bits/string.h and bits/string2.h inlines make code worse, not better.
Therefore they should be removed.

zw