Hello,
At Fri, 17 Nov 2017 13:24:08 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote in
<20171117.132408.85564852.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
> > Well, even the CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() can be called unconditionally yes.
> > It just seems like it's needless call as we'll call both in for loop
> > anyway if we take the "slow" path. I admit it's not exactly big win
> > though. If you think it would improve readability I can move it.
>
> I think this is the last message in this thread so I changed the
> status of the CF entry to "Waiting for Author".
Hmm. Somehow the last patch and Robert's comment * which is the
base of the patch * has been reached me in reverse order.
I found that the patch is the latest one and will look this
soon. Sorry for the ignorance.
regards,
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
