[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [lwip-devel] byte order, packing, optimizations
From: |
Bill Auerbach |
Subject: |
RE: [lwip-devel] byte order, packing, optimizations |
Date: |
Tue, 16 Feb 2010 08:29:56 -0500 |
Does this mean you do not want tasks and patches submitted for performance
enhancements? From the posts on lwip-users, performance may be more
important for some users than you are willing to agree with or admit to. The
point is, if those of us who are trying to improve performance are wasting
our time contributing and making suggestions it would be really good to know
that.
>Just to make sure there is no ambiguity about this, I agree.
>Performance of lwIP is secondary to ease of use, portability, and being
>lightweight.
>
>Kieran
- Re: [lwip-devel] byte order, packing, optimizations, (continued)
- RE: [lwip-devel] byte order, packing, optimizations, Stéphane Lesage, 2010/02/14
- RE: [lwip-devel] byte order, packing, optimizations, Stéphane Lesage, 2010/02/14
- RE: [lwip-devel] byte order, packing, optimizations, Stéphane Lesage, 2010/02/14
- Re: [lwip-devel] byte order, packing, optimizations, address@hidden, 2010/02/15
- RE: [lwip-devel] byte order, packing, optimizations, Bill Auerbach, 2010/02/15
- Re: [lwip-devel] byte order, packing, optimizations, address@hidden, 2010/02/15
- Re: [lwip-devel] byte order, packing, optimizations, Kieran Mansley, 2010/02/16
- RE: [lwip-devel] byte order, packing, optimizations,
Bill Auerbach <=
- RE: [lwip-devel] byte order, packing, optimizations, Simon Goldschmidt, 2010/02/16
- RE: [lwip-devel] byte order, packing, optimizations, Kieran Mansley, 2010/02/16