Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!umcp-cs!chris
From: chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (Chris Torek)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: soundex algorithm wanted
Message-ID: <3421@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 14-Sep-86 04:51:07 EDT
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.3421
Posted: Sun Sep 14 04:51:07 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 14-Sep-86 23:38:47 EDT
References: <27@houligan.UUCP> <672@bnrmtv.UUCP> <1239@whuxl.UUCP> <3266@umcp-cs.UUCP> <1244@whuxl.UUCP>
Reply-To: chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (Chris Torek)
Organization: University of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Sci.
Lines: 22

>In article <3266@umcp-cs.UUCP> I wrote:
>>All the compilers I have used ignore the `register' on `register
>>char' declarations. ... Is there ever any reason to declare a variable
>>`register char' rather than `register int'?  Are there any extant
>>compilers for which the latter will generate *worse* code?

In article <1244@whuxl.UUCP> mike@whuxl.UUCP (BALDWIN) writes:
>On a 3B20, `register char c' is indeed put in a register ....
>Of course there's a reason for declaring a variable as char
>instead of int; if it is used as a char, it should be declared char.

I agree, in principle; this is just a part of saying what you mean.
I meant to ask `is there ever any reason, other than saying what
you mean'.  I have, since I discovered that the 4BSD compiler
ignores `register' on `char's, given in to expediency.  I suppose
I was really looking for an excuse to work on the compiler.  Well,
now I have one:  Sun's compiler does indeed generate better code,
in some cases, for `register char's than for `register int's.
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 1516)
UUCP:	seismo!umcp-cs!chris
CSNet:	chris@umcp-cs		ARPA:	chris@mimsy.umd.edu