add the output of bootstrapbaserock/bootstrap-pass2baserock/bootstrap

2 files changed, 271 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/gnulib b/gnulib
deleted file mode 160000
-Subproject 443bc5ffcf7429e557f4a371b0661abe98ddbc1
diff --git a/gnulib/lib/fstrcmp.c b/gnulib/lib/fstrcmp.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..595c1f3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gnulib/lib/fstrcmp.c
@@ -0,0 +1,271 @@
+/* Functions to make fuzzy comparisons between strings
+   Copyright (C) 1988-1989, 1992-1993, 1995, 2001-2003, 2006, 2008-2011 Free
+   Software Foundation, Inc.
+
+   This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
+   it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
+   the Free Software Foundation; either version 3 of the License, or
+   (at your option) any later version.
+
+   This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
+   but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
+   MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
+   GNU General Public License for more details.
+
+   You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
+   along with this program.  If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
+
+
+   Derived from GNU diff 2.7, analyze.c et al.
+
+   The basic idea is to consider two vectors as similar if, when
+   transforming the first vector into the second vector through a
+   sequence of edits (inserts and deletes of one element each),
+   this sequence is short - or equivalently, if the ordered list
+   of elements that are untouched by these edits is long.  For a
+   good introduction to the subject, read about the "Levenshtein
+   distance" in Wikipedia.
+
+   The basic algorithm is described in:
+   "An O(ND) Difference Algorithm and its Variations", Eugene Myers,
+   Algorithmica Vol. 1 No. 2, 1986, pp. 251-266;
+   see especially section 4.2, which describes the variation used below.
+
+   The basic algorithm was independently discovered as described in:
+   "Algorithms for Approximate String Matching", E. Ukkonen,
+   Information and Control Vol. 64, 1985, pp. 100-118.
+
+   Unless the 'find_minimal' flag is set, this code uses the TOO_EXPENSIVE
+   heuristic, by Paul Eggert, to limit the cost to O(N**1.5 log N)
+   at the price of producing suboptimal output for large inputs with
+   many differences.  */
+
+#include <config.h>
+
+/* Specification.  */
+#include "fstrcmp.h"
+
+#include <string.h>
+#include <stdbool.h>
+#include <stdio.h>
+#include <stdlib.h>
+#include <limits.h>
+
+#include "glthread/lock.h"
+#include "glthread/tls.h"
+#include "minmax.h"
+#include "xalloc.h"
+
+#ifndef uintptr_t
+# define uintptr_t unsigned long
+#endif
+
+
+#define ELEMENT char
+#define EQUAL(x,y) ((x) == (y))
+#define OFFSET int
+#define EXTRA_CONTEXT_FIELDS \
+  /* The number of edits beyond which the computation can be aborted. */ \
+  int edit_count_limit; \
+  /* The number of edits (= number of elements inserted, plus the number of \
+     elements deleted), temporarily minus edit_count_limit. */ \
+  int edit_count;
+#define NOTE_DELETE(ctxt, xoff) ctxt->edit_count++
+#define NOTE_INSERT(ctxt, yoff) ctxt->edit_count++
+#define EARLY_ABORT(ctxt) ctxt->edit_count > 0
+/* We don't need USE_HEURISTIC, since it is unlikely in typical uses of
+   fstrcmp().  */
+#include "diffseq.h"
+
+
+/* Because fstrcmp is typically called multiple times, attempt to minimize
+   the number of memory allocations performed.  Thus, let a call reuse the
+   memory already allocated by the previous call, if it is sufficient.
+   To make it multithread-safe, without need for a lock that protects the
+   already allocated memory, store the allocated memory per thread.  Free
+   it only when the thread exits.  */
+
+static gl_tls_key_t buffer_key; /* TLS key for a 'int *' */
+static gl_tls_key_t bufmax_key; /* TLS key for a 'size_t' */
+
+static void
+keys_init (void)
+{
+  gl_tls_key_init (buffer_key, free);
+  gl_tls_key_init (bufmax_key, NULL);
+  /* The per-thread initial values are NULL and 0, respectively.  */
+}
+
+/* Ensure that keys_init is called once only.  */
+gl_once_define(static, keys_init_once)
+
+
+/* In the code below, branch probabilities were measured by Ralf Wildenhues,
+   by running "msgmerge LL.po coreutils.pot" with msgmerge 0.18 for many
+   values of LL.  The probability indicates that the condition evaluates
+   to true; whether that leads to a branch or a non-branch in the code,
+   depends on the compiler's reordering of basic blocks.  */
+
+
+double
+fstrcmp_bounded (const char *string1, const char *string2, double lower_bound)
+{
+  struct context ctxt;
+  int xvec_length = strlen (string1);
+  int yvec_length = strlen (string2);
+  int i;
+
+  size_t fdiag_len;
+  int *buffer;
+  size_t bufmax;
+
+  /* short-circuit obvious comparisons */
+  if (xvec_length == 0 || yvec_length == 0) /* Prob: 1% */
+    return (xvec_length == 0 && yvec_length == 0 ? 1.0 : 0.0);
+
+  if (lower_bound > 0)
+    {
+      /* Compute a quick upper bound.
+         Each edit is an insertion or deletion of an element, hence modifies
+         the length of the sequence by at most 1.
+         Therefore, when starting from a sequence X and ending at a sequence Y,
+         with N edits,  | yvec_length - xvec_length | <= N.  (Proof by
+         induction over N.)
+         So, at the end, we will have
+           edit_count >= | xvec_length - yvec_length |.
+         and hence
+           result
+             = (xvec_length + yvec_length - edit_count)
+               / (xvec_length + yvec_length)
+             <= (xvec_length + yvec_length - | yvec_length - xvec_length |)
+                / (xvec_length + yvec_length)
+             = 2 * min (xvec_length, yvec_length) / (xvec_length + yvec_length).
+       */
+      volatile double upper_bound =
+        (double) (2 * MIN (xvec_length, yvec_length))
+        / (xvec_length + yvec_length);
+
+      if (upper_bound < lower_bound) /* Prob: 74% */
+        /* Return an arbitrary value < LOWER_BOUND.  */
+        return 0.0;
+
+#if CHAR_BIT <= 8
+      /* When X and Y are both small, avoid the overhead of setting up an
+         array of size 256.  */
+      if (xvec_length + yvec_length >= 20) /* Prob: 99% */
+        {
+          /* Compute a less quick upper bound.
+             Each edit is an insertion or deletion of a character, hence
+             modifies the occurrence count of a character by 1 and leaves the
+             other occurrence counts unchanged.
+             Therefore, when starting from a sequence X and ending at a
+             sequence Y, and denoting the occurrence count of C in X with
+             OCC (X, C), with N edits,
+               sum_C | OCC (X, C) - OCC (Y, C) | <= N.
+             (Proof by induction over N.)
+             So, at the end, we will have
+               edit_count >= sum_C | OCC (X, C) - OCC (Y, C) |,
+             and hence
+               result
+                 = (xvec_length + yvec_length - edit_count)
+                   / (xvec_length + yvec_length)
+                 <= (xvec_length + yvec_length - sum_C | OCC(X,C) - OCC(Y,C) |)
+                    / (xvec_length + yvec_length).
+           */
+          int occ_diff[UCHAR_MAX + 1]; /* array C -> OCC(X,C) - OCC(Y,C) */
+          int sum;
+
+          /* Determine the occurrence counts in X.  */
+          memset (occ_diff, 0, sizeof (occ_diff));
+          for (i = xvec_length - 1; i >= 0; i--)
+            occ_diff[(unsigned char) string1[i]]++;
+          /* Subtract the occurrence counts in Y.  */
+          for (i = yvec_length - 1; i >= 0; i--)
+            occ_diff[(unsigned char) string2[i]]--;
+          /* Sum up the absolute values.  */
+          sum = 0;
+          for (i = 0; i <= UCHAR_MAX; i++)
+            {
+              int d = occ_diff[i];
+              sum += (d >= 0 ? d : -d);
+            }
+
+          upper_bound = 1.0 - (double) sum / (xvec_length + yvec_length);
+
+          if (upper_bound < lower_bound) /* Prob: 66% */
+            /* Return an arbitrary value < LOWER_BOUND.  */
+            return 0.0;
+        }
+#endif
+    }
+
+  /* set the info for each string.  */
+  ctxt.xvec = string1;
+  ctxt.yvec = string2;
+
+  /* Set TOO_EXPENSIVE to be approximate square root of input size,
+     bounded below by 256.  */
+  ctxt.too_expensive = 1;
+  for (i = xvec_length + yvec_length;
+       i != 0;
+       i >>= 2)
+    ctxt.too_expensive <<= 1;
+  if (ctxt.too_expensive < 256)
+    ctxt.too_expensive = 256;
+
+  /* Allocate memory for fdiag and bdiag from a thread-local pool.  */
+  fdiag_len = xvec_length + yvec_length + 3;
+  gl_once (keys_init_once, keys_init);
+  buffer = (int *) gl_tls_get (buffer_key);
+  bufmax = (size_t) (uintptr_t) gl_tls_get (bufmax_key);
+  if (fdiag_len > bufmax)
+    {
+      /* Need more memory.  */
+      bufmax = 2 * bufmax;
+      if (fdiag_len > bufmax)
+        bufmax = fdiag_len;
+      /* Calling xrealloc would be a waste: buffer's contents does not need
+         to be preserved.  */
+      if (buffer != NULL)
+        free (buffer);
+      buffer = (int *) xnmalloc (bufmax, 2 * sizeof (int));
+      gl_tls_set (buffer_key, buffer);
+      gl_tls_set (bufmax_key, (void *) (uintptr_t) bufmax);
+    }
+  ctxt.fdiag = buffer + yvec_length + 1;
+  ctxt.bdiag = ctxt.fdiag + fdiag_len;
+
+  /* The edit_count is only ever increased.  The computation can be aborted
+     when
+       (xvec_length + yvec_length - edit_count) / (xvec_length + yvec_length)
+       < lower_bound,
+     or equivalently
+       edit_count > (xvec_length + yvec_length) * (1 - lower_bound)
+     or equivalently
+       edit_count > floor((xvec_length + yvec_length) * (1 - lower_bound)).
+     We need to add an epsilon inside the floor(...) argument, to neutralize
+     rounding errors.  */
+  ctxt.edit_count_limit =
+    (lower_bound < 1.0
+     ? (int) ((xvec_length + yvec_length) * (1.0 - lower_bound + 0.000001))
+     : 0);
+
+  /* Now do the main comparison algorithm */
+  ctxt.edit_count = - ctxt.edit_count_limit;
+  if (compareseq (0, xvec_length, 0, yvec_length, 0, &ctxt)) /* Prob: 98% */
+    /* The edit_count passed the limit.  Hence the result would be
+       < lower_bound.  We can return any value < lower_bound instead.  */
+    return 0.0;
+  ctxt.edit_count += ctxt.edit_count_limit;
+
+  /* The result is
+        ((number of chars in common) / (average length of the strings)).
+     The numerator is
+        = xvec_length - (number of calls to NOTE_DELETE)
+        = yvec_length - (number of calls to NOTE_INSERT)
+        = 1/2 * (xvec_length + yvec_length - (number of edits)).
+     This is admittedly biased towards finding that the strings are
+     similar, however it does produce meaningful results.  */
+  return ((double) (xvec_length + yvec_length - ctxt.edit_count)
+          / (xvec_length + yvec_length));
+}