Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 19:36:13 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: obrien@freebsd.org Cc: rjesup@wgate.com, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: stpcpy() Message-ID: <199911011936.MAA29291@usr02.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <19991029234654.B89583@dragon.nuxi.com> from "David O'Brien" at Oct 29, 99 11:46:55 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Fri, Oct 29, 1999 at 03:58:14PM +0000, Randell Jesup wrote: > > stpcpy() (the issue in this case) is something I've seen in > > compiler's C libraries since the late 80's/early 90's (if I remember > > correctly), if I remember correctly. Quite honestly, it's useful > ... > > It's handy and improves performance for the cases where it's > > Why is it so useful and "improves" performance so much?? I'll only > believe this when I see some perf traces. Strings don't tend to be very > long ( < 256). Thus an c*O(n), where c = (2 + 1 function call) doesn't > sound like a big savings. Especially in the face of portability. > > I really think 99% of the programs using stpcpy() for "speed" reasons > would spend 99% of their time elsewhere if p=strchr(strcpy(d,s), '\0'); > were used. I believe the point is to iterate the string once, instead of twice, without having to learn how to use pointers yourself. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199911011936.MAA29291>