jtc@acorntoolworks.com said:
> While I haven't tested them on older Intel, VIA,  Transmeta, etc.
> machines; I would expect them to be faster for  the simple reason that
> the new code does less "work". 

Good. Assuming that the increase in code size / cache footprint
doesn't hurt... The majority of users would gain, so since I have it
ready I'll just commit it.

> I've been using this code in both libc and libkern without problem
> since I submitted it.

For libkern I don't consider it _that_ useful. String processing
in the kernel is minimal. The "worst cpu hog" (strncmp) is around
line 500 in my profiling output.
Also, these functions get pulled into boot code, where size
matters a lot.

best regards
Matthias