On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Allan McRae
Hi devs,
I thought I would forward this here so we all see it. From my testing of this, it runs much faster (~5x) than the current lddd. It also gives me no false positives (although the results from the current lddd can be restored with the -L flag).
I have not spent much time looking at the code, but this seems a great candidate to replace the current lddd after some review.
My only comment is that the code seems overly long (old lddd was around 50 lines, this is 750) and appears to have lots of debug-ish variables everywhere (see the cur_func variable in every function). A speed improvement is great, but if this turns into something no one can maintain due to complexity, is it going to gain us anything?