Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Kamil, >> New version of filevercmp.c is attached, now without copying of the input >> strings. I've also made a simple performance test - the speed was about 7-8x >> slower than original glibc strverscmp function, but the glibc's result is >> mostly wrong. > > If you didn't get feedback from Jim, here's mine.
Hi Bruno, Thanks for replying. Kamil and I talked on IRC, but not about these particular points. > Indeed speed matters less than correctness. First get the results right, > then only think about optimization. I agree completely. > For a use in 'ls', the time of the ... Kamil, you may expect to use the new function in ls, too. The more I think of this, the more I'm convinced producing sensible results is what matters here. Being completely compatible with older versions of ls -v is not important.
