To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: [long] gcc performance and possible bug
References: <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1000307103019 DOT 21628J-100000 AT is>
From: Esa A E Peuha <peuha AT cc DOT helsinki DOT fi>
Date: 08 Mar 2000 10:44:55 +0200
In-Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 7 Mar 2000 10:30:43 +0200 (IST)"
Message-ID: <86p4sahx33s.fsf@sirppi.helsinki.fi>
Lines: 15
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.6.43/Emacs 19.34
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> writes:

> >     (null): s=3051870873, used 3.077 CPU seconds 0.02292 usec/call
> >     (null): s=3051870873, used 25.934 CPU seconds 0.19322 usec/call
> >     ^^^^^^

> Doesn't this bomb on plain DOS with CWSDPMI?

Why would it?  printf is smart enough to test the pointer for being null
before attempting to dereference it, and prints "(null)" if it is.

-- 
Esa Peuha
student of mathematics at the University of Helsinki
http://www.helsinki.fi/~peuha/