RE: [PATCH] Further improve xdelta

That seems to be an aesthetic reaction, which doesn't outweigh the real,
measurable benefits of the performance work. I would prefer have to have
this performance work checked in. Did you actually build both, and see a
noticeable increase in binary size?

-- arlie

-----Original Message-----
From: justin.erenkrantz@gmail.com [mailto:justin.erenkrantz@gmail.com] On
Behalf Of Justin Erenkrantz
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 12:35 PM
To: Greg Hudson
Cc: dev@subversion.tigris.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Further improve xdelta

On 3/24/06, Greg Hudson <ghudson@mit.edu> wrote:
> Did you look at the patch? The custom hash table is like 20 lines of
> code.

Of course, I did. So?

Code bloat should be treated with suspicion. It seems like there is enough
of an argument here - but it's mainly to do with the further optimizations
Dan mentioned - not this particular change. -- justin

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Mar 24 18:48:35 2006