auto length = last - first;
    while (length > 0) {
       auto half = length / 2;
       if (comp(first[half], value)) {
          // length - half equals half + length % 2
          first += length - half;
       }
       length = half;
    }
    return first;

https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/commit/677c6f8457943fe5b56d7a...

It only works if the comparator is inlined, which is why I had to use a macro and duplicate the code everywhere. C++’s templates effectively do the same thing.

By the way, I notice that C++ favors comparators returning a boolean while C favors comparators returning -1, 0 or 1. Let me share this simple macro from ZFS:

#define TREE_CMP(a, b) (((a) > (b)) - ((a) < (b)))

Use that to generate -1, 0 or 1. Then if you want a boolean, compare the output to < 0 to get the boolean that a C++ comparator would return and as long as the comparator is inlined, the compiler will automatically simplify, such that you get only 1 comparison.

The C++ STL designers who opted for a boolean return value from comparators did premature optimization, since they had no reason to break with the C convention under C++’s "the compiler will inline and optimize" philosophy. The neat thing about the C way is that if you want to generate a boolean from the comparator, you have a choice for the boolean’s semantics (< 0 or <= 0) while C++ made that choice for you.

That said, I have never needed the latter and as a much younger developer, I thought that the C++ way was superior, but time has caused me to conclude the C guys got this right.

Finally, since I am on topic of comparators, there is a fairly famous example of how to generate -1, 0 or 1 when comparing against 0:

https://www.cs.cornell.edu/courses/cs6120/2020fa/blog/super-...

I only mention it since it is interesting and I like sharing interesting things. Reimplementing the signum function from there with TREE_CMP() does not generate code as good as the superoptimized example in godbolt:

https://godbolt.org/z/1j8nWjnqP

It is probably an optimization opportunity for GCC.

"The most notable variant, the monobound binary search, executes two to four times faster than the standard binary search on arrays smaller than 1 million 32 bit integers."