X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <4701C96B.8050708@cwilson.fastmail.fm> Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2007 00:30:35 -0400 From: Charles Wilson User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: llrint implementation in Cygwin References: <46F6C151.3070301@computer.org> <46FEC886.7020007@cwilson.fastmail.fm> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com Diego Biurrun wrote: > Next time you call shenanigans, get your facts straight first please. I > never claimed that we do not *have* OS-specific workarounds, I said we > do not *add* them. That's a verrrry fine distinction and was not at all clear from the foregoing conversation. > > The libavcodec directory has entirely separate >> subdirs for different processors -- platform specificity is BUILT IN >> to the ffmpeg source tree. > > Nonsense. These are assembler optimizations for speed-critical > functions (and the reason why you can watch movies without GHz CPUs). > These are, by their very nature, processor-specific, but they are not > workarounds. Nothing could be further from the truth. It's an example of special purpose (blocks of) code, where a given block is compiled only under particular circumstances -- e.g. for a specific target cpu -- in pursuit of a particular goal. In this case: speed. Control flow (whether a particular file or block of code is actually compiled for a given target) is determined by...for lack of a better term, "makefile magic". > > That file ALSO contains a >> half-dozen implementations of read_time depending on which >> microprocessor architecture is in use. > > What does this have to do with a workaround? read_time is internally > used in some benchmarking macros, it is not an OS function. It's an exampleof special purpose (blocks of) code, where a given block is compiled only under particular circumstances -- e.g. for a specific target cpu -- in pursuit of a particular goal. In this case: high res benchmarking. Control flow (whether a particular file or block of code is actually compiled for a given target) is determined by...using the earlier nomenclature, "ifdef magic". > >> Oh, and lookee here, in the same file: >> >> #ifndef HAVE_LRINTF >> /* XXX: add ISOC specific test to avoid specific BSD testing. */ >> /* better than nothing implementation. */ >> /* btw, rintf() is existing on fbsd too -- alex */ >> static av_always_inline long int lrintf(float x) >> { >> return (int)(rint(x)); >> } >> #endif /* HAVE_LRINTF */ > > Good catch, this is cruft from ages ago. I will look into nuking this > very soon. So, I find an example of EXACTLY the sort of feature-dependent workaround under discussion, and your response is "no, that's not a valid example...and if it is, we'll get rid of it?" Look, the point is: there are many platforms out there that do not support the entire panoply of C99 functions. Or even all POSIX (1b? 1c? 1e? 2?) functions. If the FFMpeg team cares about portability, the correct answer is not to climb upon a high horse, declaim "we do not [use|add] platform-specific workarounds" and deliberately release code that is /not/ portable to the disdained platform -- and then blame that platform for not updating their runtime library according to /your/ project's release schedule. "Well, cygwin will just have to be broken" If you do /not/ care about portability, then the response above is perfectly fine. > So all in all you have refuted some points I never made, while bungling > some of the research used to substantiate your claims. What is the > point you are trying to prove here? No, you missed the point of the three examples. They demonstrate a plethora of special-purpose code: whether (the control flow determining if a particular hunk of code is compiled) is in the Makefile magic (build the i386 subdir, don't build the ppc subdir, etc) or is in the ifdef magic (#ifdef HAVE_I386_CPU, etc) is immaterial. And is no different than: #ifndef HAVE_LLRINTF replacement code for llrintf() #endif (which is feature-based, not platform-based, anyway!) It was just disappointing to see a simple replacement function -- no different in principle than any of the three examples I provided, and practically identical to the last example, rejected with a blase' "we don't add platform-specific workarounds -- cygwin will just have to be broken". WTH? -- Chuck -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/