[Vm-dev] Performance of primitiveFailFor: and use of primFailCode

[David T. Lewis]

On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 02:33:52PM -0700, Eliot Miranda wrote:
>  
> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 2:08 PM, David T. Lewis <lewis at mail.msen.com> wrote:
> >
> >  Testing success status, original:
> >        if (foo->successFlag) { ... }
> >
> >  Testing success status, new:
> >        if (foo->primFailCode == 0) { ... }
> >
> >  Setting failure status, original:
> >         foo->successFlag = 0;
> >
> >  Setting failure status, new:
> >        if (foo->primFailCode == 0) {
> >                foo->primFailCode = 1;
> >        }
> >
> > So in each case the global struct is being used, both for successFlag
> > and primFailCode. Sorry for the confusion. In any case, I'm still left
> > scratching my head over the size of the performance difference.
> >
> 
> One thought, where are successFlag and primFailCode in the struct?  Perhaps
> the size of the offset needed to access them makes a difference?

In both cases they are the first element of the struct, so that
cannot be it.

I think I had better circle back and redo my tests. Maybe I made
a mistake somewhere.

Thanks,
Dave