Re: [Libreoffice] [REVIEW] request for review for patch for fdo#32742# regression

Not trying to hijack, but i'm still a novice developer still learning 
the ways of development, but is there such a thing as over optimization?

On 1/12/11 7:36 PM, Noel Power wrote:
> On 12/01/11 18:03, Norbert Thiebaud wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 10:35 AM, Octavio Alvarez
> > <alvarezp@alvarezp.ods.org>  wrote:
> > > On Wed, 12 Jan 2011 03:18:01 -0800, Noel Power<nopower@novell.com>  
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi there
> > > >
> > > > fix for fdo#32742#, its a simple fix ( but was a bugger to find ) 
> > > > imo is
> > > > riskless etc.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/base/commit/?id=0afe2266016b03f6e11008463042c7daacead0e1 
> > > >
> > > > is ripe for signoff and cherrypicking, be grateful if someone could 
> > > > help
> > > > with that
> > > Is suggest to make ::std::sort on the next line use s_nCount also and
> > > prevent a useless division operation.
> > Actually the 'useless' division' is resolved at compile time. so it 
> > is free.
> > on the other hand passing s_nCount instead of a constant _could_
> > deprive the template code of some possible optimizations.
> > (I don't know if std::sort is smart enough to take avantage of it..
> > but it could, and eventually it will)
> >
> > Norbert
> the other thing to remember is that this is some static 
> initialisation, it is done just once, so even thinking about 
> optimising that would seem to be overkill :-)
> _______________________________________________
> LibreOffice mailing list
> LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice