Stefan Küng <tortoisesvn@gmail.com> wrote on 12/19/2005 03:53:38 PM:
> I've read that too. But with a good optimizing compiler, there won't be
> much of a speed reduction without assembler.
>
> What do you mean with "run circles"? And why should 32-bit builds even
> try to load *our* openssl dll? The dll is in our own install dir, and
> that's the only place it belongs (read the openssl docs: they clearly
> state that you must not put it in Windows or System32 or the Win64
> equivalent of these dirs).
I believe he was implying that a 32-bit version of TSVN would run circles
around the 64-bit version because of this. Personally, I am more in your
camp on this. I think that SSL plays such a small role in the equation
that the difference wouldn't be that big. Besides, 64-bit is not supposed
to be faster than 32-bit. It is supposed to allow access to more RAM. The
point of TSVN being 64-bit is that it is an Explorer shell extension and
since Explorer is 64-bit this is just about being compatible and
convenient for the user. It is not as if TSVN or SVN for that matter are
taking advantage of what 64-bits offer. To be honest, I am not sure why
anyone runs Win 64-bit anyway. Do you have more than 4 GB of RAM in your
desktop? Neither the Intel nor the AMD processors incur any performance
hit for 32-bit code so running 64-bit doesn't really give you anything. If
anything it probably makes things marginally slower as items take a bit
more space and use a bit mor RAM.
Mark
_____________________________________________________________________________
Scanned for SoftLanding Systems, Inc. and SoftLanding Europe Plc by IBM Email Security Management Services powered by MessageLabs.
_____________________________________________________________________________
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
Received on Mon Dec 19 22:17:29 2005