Article View: comp.lang.c.moderated
Article #2440Re: void* type
From: Claus Hirth
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 16:43
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 16:43
25 lines
1094 bytes
1094 bytes
J. Kanze (kanze@gabi-soft.fr) wrote:
: BTW, I've found that a small optimizing trick in functions like this can
: sometimes work wonders for performance:
: int
: swap( void* a , void* b , size_t sz )
: {
: unsigned char buffer[ EXPECTEDMAXSIZE ] ;
An even smaller "trick" : use a static array instead.
Anyway.
What still nags at me about the portability issue :
Is there a machine still in use (Kurt, please name it)
on which the representation of a
double *
differs from the representation of a
char *
?
Have a nice week-end
Claus
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<4jmcnh$lqk@solutions.solon.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!solon.com!not-for-mailReferences:
<4iepre$ag7@solutions.solon.com> <4ii34g$nlp@solutions.solon.com> <4jibl5$89u@solutions.solon.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!solon.com!not-for-mail From: Claus Hirth <hirth@wand.franken.de> Newsgroups: comp.lang.c.moderated Subject: Re: void* type Date: 31 Mar 1996 10:43:29 -0600 Organization: private site Sender: clc@solutions.solon.com Approved: clc@solutions.solon.com Message-ID: <4jmcnh$lqk@solutions.solon.com> References: <4iepre$ag7@solutions.solon.com> <4ii34g$nlp@solutions.solon.com> <4jibl5$89u@solutions.solon.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: solutions.solon.com X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]