On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think there's probably more than that to work out, but in any case
> there's no harm in getting a simple optimization done first before
> moving on to a complicated one.
I guess we never talked about the abort logic in all that much detail.
I suppose there's that, too.
> I rather assume we could reuse the results of the first memcmp()
> instead of doing it again.
>
> x = memcmp();
> if (x == 0)
> return x;
> y = strcoll();
> if (y == 0)
> return x;
> return y;
Of course, but you know what I mean. (I'm sure the compiler will
realize this if the programmer doesn't)
--
Peter Geoghegan
