DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:reply-to:mime-version:to
	:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=tHt3LCLD9j5uzUh1
	k2qrHoy7BQcQHNmiHRAn/kS74sxyUcweczHj+G2ZBqFm9hrX3q0FIe0IG93Vb+sw
	ZgHHsWy5bnuBGwAN+GJsaedaobrw5R7G24ledcG2P8LmeN4D4N7PIrw0xiBUJRic
	/oARvTtT2ezujV99Ke22CwJW7OM=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-id: <519B8A51.4070505@cygwin.com>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 10:53:05 -0400
From: "Larry Hall (Cygwin)" <reply-to-list-only-lh AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-to: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: BUG: Ability to access nonexistent directories
References: <000201ce52c4$891b04c0$9b510e40$%fedin AT samsung DOT com> <20130517083612 DOT GE21752 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <000d01ce52dc$74e54bb0$5eafe310$%fedin AT samsung DOT com> <20130517102655 DOT GG21752 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <20130517145612 DOT GC7087 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <001a01ce5550$9e20afd0$da620f70$%fedin AT samsung DOT com> <519A3E58 DOT 4010609 AT cygwin DOT com> <000101ce55e9$6ab6f840$4024e8c0$%fedin AT samsung DOT com> <20130521061816 DOT GC3786 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>
In-reply-to: <20130521061816.GC3786@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

On 5/21/2013 2:18 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:07:03AM +0400, Fedin Pavel wrote:
>>> Not to discourage you but there will be a fairly low tolerance for much
>>> of a complexity change or almost any performance degradation.  Cygwin's
>>> performance is a regular source of complaints on this list (and
>>> elsewhere).
>>
>> By the way... Right now i'm testing 64-bit Cygwin, and it appears to be
>> significantly faster. I wonder, did you do anything special to achieve this
>> ? Or does this mean just that 32-bit API on 64-bit Windows is slow ?
>
> The 64-bit port employed fewer hippos.  As it turns out, they were terrible
> coders.

And hippos aside (I think we all know how difficult it is to do that!), 
64-bit proggies on 64-bit CPUs are supposed to be a little zippier anyway.

-- 
Larry

_____________________________________________________________________

A: Yes.
 > Q: Are you sure?
 >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
 >>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email?

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple