[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: svn commit: r997203 - in /subversion/trunk: ./ subversion/include/ subversion/libsvn_client/ subversion/libsvn_diff/ subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/ subversion/libsvn_ra_svn/ subversion/libsvn_repos/ subversion/libsvn_subr/ subversion/libsvn_wc/ subversion/sv...

From: Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de>
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 09:45:41 +0200

On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 06:52:07AM -0000, hwright_at_apache.org wrote:
> ==============================================================================
> --- subversion/trunk/subversion/include/svn_string.h (original)
> +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/include/svn_string.h Wed Sep 15 06:52:06 2010
> @@ -253,6 +253,15 @@ svn_stringbuf_chop(svn_stringbuf_t *str,
> void
> svn_stringbuf_fillchar(svn_stringbuf_t *str, unsigned char c);
>
> +/** Append a single character @a byte onto @a targetstr.
> + *
> + * reallocs if necessary. @a targetstr is affected, nothing else is.
> + * @since New in 1.7.
> + */
> +void
> +svn_stringbuf_appendbyte(svn_stringbuf_t *targetstr,
> + char byte);
> +

The docstring should list advantages svn_stringbuf_appendbyte(buf, c)
has over svn_stringbuf_appendbytes(buf, &c, 1). We need to understand
where the performance benefits really come from. IIRC the benefit was
dependent on the optimizer in the compiler to some extent, is this correct?

Stefan
Received on 2010-09-15 09:46:46 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.