[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [bug-gperf] unsigned long vs. unsigned int
|
From: |
Bruno Haible |
|
Subject: |
Re: [bug-gperf] unsigned long vs. unsigned int |
|
Date: |
Thu, 05 Sep 2019 01:58:22 +0200 |
|
User-agent: |
KMail/5.1.3 (Linux/4.4.0-159-generic; KDE/5.18.0; x86_64; ; ) |
Hello Mark,
> SECOND SUGGESTION ( EASY )
>
> With 64 bit machines, "unsigned long" is probably more efficient to pass
> around than "unsigned int". An option --return_type = "unsigned int"
> with --return_type = "unsigned long" could be helpful.
'unsigned long' is generally faster to access and move around on 64-bit
machines than 'unsigned int'.
Since version 3.1, the string length parameter in gperf-generated code is
'size_t', which on 64-bit platforms (excluding native Windows) is equivalent
to 'unsigned long'.
What other opportunities to use 'unsigned long' do you see?
Bruno