96b62ff804
So instead of using C's ternary operator everywhere:
(condition)
? LFSR_ATTR(rid, tag, delta, data)
: LFSR_ATTR_NOOP
Use incremental attr allocation instead:
lfsr_attr_t attrs[1];
lfs_size_t attr_count = 0;
if (condition) {
attrs[attr_count++] = LFSR_ATTR(rid, tag, delta, data);
}
LFS_ASSERT(attr_count <= sizeof(attrs)/sizeof(lfsr_attr_t));
Incremental attr allocation is more flexible, allowing nested conditions
and conditions that span multiple attrs without sacrificing readability,
though at a verbosity cost.
We already need this for lfsr_btree_commit and lfsr_file_carve, adopting
it everywhere we need conditional attrs allows us to drop the noop attr
and avoid messy and hard-to-read C expressions.
This also changes the lfsr_btree_commit to explicitly omit noop grows.
We were relying on lfsr_rbyd_appendattr implicitly skipping these to
avoid unnecessary attr commits, but I think it's probably better to make
these noops explicit.
This does add some code cost though, I'm guessing sequential conditional
attrs landing at different offsets complicates code generation a bit:
code stack
before: 33940 2928
after: 34052 (+0.3%) 2928 (+0.0%)