[Zlib-devel] request for feedback; how trusted is match.asm

[William A. Rowe, Jr.]

Mark Adler wrote:
> On May 3, 2006, at 12:55 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> 
>>Can we say that if ml is available, match.asm is sufficiently maintained
>>to match the reliability of the C implementation?  Or should folks who need
>>strong stability stay clear of it?
> 
> The stuff in the contrib directory is not part of the official zlib  
> distribution, so the party line would be you use it at your own  
> risk.  Then again, you also use zlib at your own risk, so it's not a  
> whole lot different.

/nod

> If folk believe that there is enough testing, we could consider  
> moving the asm stuff into the main directory to make a default part  
> of the zlib build.

Even in lieu of that, it seems that the win32-ish masm686 is now quite out
of date, superceeded by the parallel masmx86 and masmx64.  Can someone clear
up my confusion, or confirm that masm686/match.asm is really quite dead?

Bill