Re: Patch to add __builtin_printf

["Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu>]

 > From: Todd Vierling <tv@pobox.com>
 > 
 > On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, Kaveh R. Ghazi wrote:
 > 
 > : This patch adds __builtin_printf.  It uses the same mechanism for
 > : obtaining the FUNCTION_DECL for the replacements as does builtin
 > : fputs, namely declare stub replacement builtins and cache the result.
 > 
 > Would it be possible to do similar replacements for fprintf?
 > 
 > fprintf(file, "%s", foo) -> fputs(foo, file) [*]
 > fprintf(file, "%c", foo) -> fputc(foo, file) [**]
 > fprintf(file, "c") -> fputc('c', file) [**]

Yes, these are in the works.  Though there are some problems I need to
solve WRT declaring the builtin with a FILE* and "..." that I'll
detail in a future message.  But first I'm going to add another printf
opt.


 >   If desired, an additional optimization for
 >     "%s\n" could consist of a builtin_fputs followed by a builtin_fputc,
 >     likely still faster than the fprintf.
 > 
 > [**] Though not as fast as the typical macro putc() due to the function call
 >      overhead, fputc() is quicker than fprintf() in these cases, and the
 >      function call was there to begin with anyway.  If a builtin fputc()
 >      takes over at this point, that's an added bonus.

I've designed ways to trap the putc macro as an inline function and
issue it as a replacement for fputc, but the resulting code size
increase has been significant relative to the speed increase.  I might
only provide that one as a special -f option or perhaps at -O3, if at
all.  The same issue arises for fprintf("%s\n") -> fputs+fputc, though
not as pronounced.

		--Kaveh
--
Kaveh R. Ghazi			Engagement Manager / Project Services
ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu		Qwest Internet Solutions