On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 03:21:15AM +0300, Alexey Tourbin wrote:
> There are other reasons, such as keeping the code comprehensible (at the
> expense of some runtime penalties).  I think the concept of bitv[] is
> crucial for understanding the code, and it helps to keep the code clean
> and self-evident.  Replacing bitv[] with bitmap might be a major trade-off
> for the sake of performance.  Or might not.

Storing one byte per bit is crucial for understanding the code?
What a nonsense!


-- 
ldv