Re: Bison patch to use unlocked I/O if available

[Paul Eggert]

Akim Demaille <address@hidden> writes:

> The changed order, in particular, is a PITA.  Of course
> this misfeature comes from C itself.

I agree with you about the order and about the misfeature.
But the code already had many uses of putc and puts.

There is some argument for doing things uniformly -- that is, either
always use putc/puts when possible, or always use printf.  The code
wasn't uniform in that sense.  I chose the former as it is slightly
more efficient and it gives a signal to the reader when printf's power
isn't needed.  But you could talk me into the latter as well, at least
for Bison itself.

For data/* and lib/*, though, we're talking about code in other
applications.  Wouldn't it be better there to use the
higher-performance solution if it's as easy as this?