Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from July 2019
On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 03:07:48PM -0700, Hugo van der Sanden via RT wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 14:18:01 -0700, jkeenan wrote:
> > On Mon, 22 Jul 2019 20:06:30 GMT, jkeenan wrote:
> > > Applying to branch for smoke testing.
> >
> > Smoke-test results in the branch appear satisfactory.
> >
> > http://perl.develop-help.com/?b=smoke-me%2Fjkeenan%2Fhv%2F134172-
> > sprintf
> >
> > What else do we have to decide before merging this branch and closing
> > this ticket?
>
> I'd like to get some feedback, particularly from Karl and Dave; Karl has already indicated he'll try to take a look this weekend. It also looks like Tony has been looking into the same issue, I just noticed he has created a branch tonyc/134172-in-lc which may have duplicated some of the work.
>
> Given clean smokes, I'm already pretty comfortable with the first patch; the second patch ("Avoid multiple checks of IN_LC(LC_NUMERIC)") probably needs better documentation, possibly better naming, and due consideration whether to expose the new macros as part of the API.
>
> Hugo
It looks reasonable to me.
One thing I noticed in the original code was that
STORE_LC_NUMERIC_SET_TO_NEEDED() could call the possibly expensive
IN_LC(LC_NUMERIC) up to three times:
+ ( ( in_lc_numeric && _NOT_IN_NUMERIC_UNDERLYING) \
+ || (! in_lc_numeric && _NOT_IN_NUMERIC_STANDARD))); \
+ if (in_lc_numeric) { \
(for a bare STORE_LC_NUMERIC_SET_TO_NEEDED() in_lc_numeric is
IN_LC(LC_NUMERIC) )
Tony
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next