From: Dale Johannesen <dalej@apple.com>
To: Zack Weinberg <zack@codesourcery.com>
Cc: Dale Johannesen <dalej@apple.com>, Michael Matz <matz@suse.de>,
Jamie Lokier <egcs@tantalophile.demon.co.uk>,
Kevin Lawton <kevinlawton2001@yahoo.com>,
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Request of new __attribute__ for switch statements (elimination of the bounds check)
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 19:18:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <F202BFD8-E0A2-11D6-B07C-000393D76DAA@apple.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20021016004929.GO15067@codesourcery.com>
On Tuesday, October 15, 2002, at 05:49 PM, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> It's just that I see removing the bounds checks on a switch statement
> as a marginal optimization compared to the risk. I've never seen a
> switch be the bottleneck in anything.
I have. However, it was a switch on (x&7) with 8 cases, not an enum.
I do not think new syntax is the right way to fix this case, which
demonstrates an optimizer deficiency.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-10-16 1:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-10-11 13:20 Kevin Lawton
2002-10-12 4:18 ` Ralph Loader
2002-10-14 8:31 ` Richard Zidlicky
2002-10-14 10:09 ` Dale Johannesen
2002-10-14 21:11 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-10-14 22:01 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-10-15 8:12 ` Michael Matz
2002-10-15 19:15 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-10-15 19:18 ` Dale Johannesen [this message]
2002-10-16 14:07 ` Richard Henderson
2002-10-15 21:16 ` Kevin Lawton
2002-10-15 23:40 ` Tim Hollebeek
2002-10-16 3:40 ` Michael Matz
2002-10-16 13:38 ` Tim Hollebeek
2002-10-16 14:23 ` Michael Matz
2002-10-16 13:27 ` Hartmut Schirmer
2002-10-16 3:25 ` Joseph S. Myers
2002-10-16 7:57 ` Fergus Henderson
2002-10-16 11:19 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-10-15 7:54 ` Michael Matz
2002-10-15 13:29 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-10-15 14:06 ` Kevin Lawton
2002-10-15 15:32 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-10-15 14:28 ` Michael Matz
2002-10-15 15:19 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-10-11 13:22 Robert Dewar
2002-10-11 15:12 ` Kevin Lawton
2002-10-12 10:43 ` Alexandre Oliva
2002-10-15 6:43 Mattias Engdegård
2002-10-15 22:40 Robert Dewar
2002-10-15 23:57 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-10-16 9:19 Robert Dewar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=F202BFD8-E0A2-11D6-B07C-000393D76DAA@apple.com \
--to=dalej@apple.com \
--cc=egcs@tantalophile.demon.co.uk \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=kevinlawton2001@yahoo.com \
--cc=matz@suse.de \
--cc=zack@codesourcery.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).