Re: [Gimp-print-devel] Performance

[<sh...@al...>]

> I did a round of performance tuning tonight.  Essentially, I got rid
> of all but a very few uses of long long; the performance improvement
> is about 40%.

Hmm, I'm surprised it made that much of a difference.

Anyway, from a performance point of view, wouldn't it have made more sense
to go from long long to just plain long, rather than int?

For i386, long and int are equivalent, but, on systems with 64 bit CPU's,
long is equivalent to long long, but, these are precisely the same CPU's
that won't take the same performance hits for using long long that the
i386's do.

Eric