From: René Scharfe Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2017 16:59:37 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] add SWAP macro Message-ID: <11e27272-c1cd-a127-eb44-385d827af63d@web.de> In-Reply-To: Am 30.01.2017 um 17:01 schrieb Johannes Schindelin: > Hi René, > > On Sat, 28 Jan 2017, René Scharfe wrote: > >> diff --git a/git-compat-util.h b/git-compat-util.h >> index 87237b092b..66cd466eea 100644 >> --- a/git-compat-util.h >> +++ b/git-compat-util.h >> @@ -527,6 +527,16 @@ static inline int ends_with(const char *str, const char *suffix) >> return strip_suffix(str, suffix, &len); >> } >> >> +#define SWAP(a, b) do { \ >> + void *_swap_a_ptr = &(a); \ >> + void *_swap_b_ptr = &(b); \ >> + unsigned char _swap_buffer[sizeof(a)]; \ >> + memcpy(_swap_buffer, _swap_a_ptr, sizeof(a)); \ >> + memcpy(_swap_a_ptr, _swap_b_ptr, sizeof(a) + \ >> + BUILD_ASSERT_OR_ZERO(sizeof(a) == sizeof(b))); \ >> + memcpy(_swap_b_ptr, _swap_buffer, sizeof(a)); \ >> +} while (0) >> + >> #if defined(NO_MMAP) || defined(USE_WIN32_MMAP) > > It may seem as a matter of taste, or maybe not: I prefer this without the > _swap_a_ptr (and I would also prefer not to use identifiers starting with > an underscore, as section 7.1.3 Reserved Identifiers of the C99 standard > says they are reserved): > > +#define SWAP(a, b) do { \ > + unsigned char swap_buffer_[sizeof(a)]; \ > + memcpy(swap_buffer_, &(a), sizeof(a)); \ > + memcpy(&(a), &(b), sizeof(a) + \ > + BUILD_ASSERT_OR_ZERO(sizeof(a) == sizeof(b))); \ > + memcpy(&(b), swap_buffer_, sizeof(a)); \ > +} while (0) We can move the underscore to the end, but using a and b directly will give surprising results if the parameters have side effects. E.g. if you want to swap the first two elements of two arrays you might want to do this: SWAP(*x++, *y++); SWAP(*x++, *y++); And that would increment twice as much as one would guess and access unexpected elements. > One idea to address the concern that not all C compilers people use to > build Git may optimize away those memcpy()s: we could also introduce a > SWAP_PRIMITIVE_TYPE (or SWAP2 or SIMPLE_SWAP or whatever) that accepts > only primitive types. But since __typeof__() is not portable... I wouldn't worry too much about such a solution before seeing that SWAP (even with memcpy(3) -- this function is probably optimized quite heavily on most platforms) causes an actual performance problem. René