Linus Torvalds writes: (Summary) Since I
think autoconf is evil crap, I refuse to have anything what-so-ever to
do with it.
do with it.
gperf is clearly written by clowns that don't understand about compatibility issues - it would have been trivial for them to add some kind of marker define so that you could test for this directly rather than depend on some kind of autoconf "try to build and see if it fails" crap.
fails" crap.
So I think the best option would be to jhust get rid of gperf, and use a normal hash function instead (even if it isn't "perfect" - it's not like perfect hashes are so wonderful).
like perfect hashes are so wonderful).
I wonder if those two ID lookups are even worth hashing at all - the arrays aren't so big, and the uses aren't so timing-critical, so it's entirely possible that we could just get rid of any hashing at all and just use some stupid linear search thing.
just use some stupid linear search thing.
I assume that flex/bison are stable enough that we don't have the same k
do with it.
gperf is clearly written by clowns that don't understand about compatibility issues - it would have been trivial for them to add some kind of marker define so that you could test for this directly rather than depend on some kind of autoconf "try to build and see if it fails" crap.
fails" crap.
So I think the best option would be to jhust get rid of gperf, and use a normal hash function instead (even if it isn't "perfect" - it's not like perfect hashes are so wonderful).
like perfect hashes are so wonderful).
I wonder if those two ID lookups are even worth hashing at all - the arrays aren't so big, and the uses aren't so timing-critical, so it's entirely possible that we could just get rid of any hashing at all and just use some stupid linear search thing.
just use some stupid linear search thing.
I assume that flex/bison are stable enough that we don't have the same k