Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 10:25:54 -0500
To: Hong Kong Phoey <hongkongphoey@gmail.com>
Cc: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] DM9000 network driver
Message-ID: <20050318152554.GH17865@csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
References: <20050318133143.GA20838@metis.extern.pengutronix.de> <4f6c1bdf0503180711148b8f02@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4f6c1bdf0503180711148b8f02@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
From: lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Lennart Sorensen)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 985
Lines: 33

On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 08:41:52PM +0530, Hong Kong Phoey wrote:
> Sacrificing readibility a little bit, you could do something useful.
> Instead of those ugly switch statements you could define function
> pointer arrays and call appropriate function
> 
> switch(foo) {
> 
>   case 1:
>              f1();
>   case2 :
>              f2();
> };
> 
> could well become
> 
> void (*func)[] = { f1, f2 };
> 
> func(i);

Ewww!

How about sticking with obvious readable code rather than trying to save
a couple of conditional branches.  If it is an obvious good
optimization, let the compiler do it.  of course if you ever needed to
pass different parameters to f1 and/or f2 it would have to be rewritten
back to the original again.

Len Sorensen
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/