Re: MinGW port usable

Johannes Schindelin [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

I wonder what the difference is between NO_MMAP=Yes and NO_MMAP=
on Windows.

Cygwin:
	real    0m0.812s
and
	real    0m2.094s

IOW, the numbers are slightly worse (!) than with mmap().

Slightly?  That's double the time!
 

MinGW does not even have mmap().

But Windows has something almost there.  I just read a flame war
thread about implementing mmap in libiberty for MinGW by stealing
source from Cygwin, and how the FSF might feel about someone's
dirty feet after playing rugby.  Yea... Google is good.  :)

-- 
Shawn.