News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:A leap year check in three instructions by gpderetta on Friday May 16, 2025 @07:51AM (#44004256)
You could argue that the setb and ret are not part of the leap year check itself. For example if the compiled inlined the call into a caller doing:

    if(is_leap_year_fast()) {...}
Then the ret would obviously go away and the setb wouldn't be necessary as it could generate directly a conditional jmp from the result of the cmp.
Re:A leap year check in three instructions by npendleton on Friday May 16, 2025 @08:22AM (#44004560)
Hah, great point!