On Mon, 5 Aug 2024 at 13:34, Joel Jacobson <joel@compiler.org> wrote:
>
> Noted from 5e1f3b9eb:
> "While it adds some space on 32-bit machines, we aren't optimizing for that case anymore."
>
> In this case, the extra 32-bit numeric_mul code seems to be 89 lines of code, excluding comments.
> To me, this seems like quite a lot, so I lean on thinking we should omit that code for now.
> We can always add it later if we get pushback.
>
OK, I guess that's reasonable. There is no clear-cut right answer
here, but I don't really want to have a lot of 32-bit-specific code
that significantly complicates this function, making it harder to
maintain. Without that code, the patch becomes much simpler, which
seems like a decent justification for any performance tradeoffs on
32-bit machines that are unlikely to affect many people anyway.
Regards,
Dean
