From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 66338 invoked by alias); 30 Jun 2015 10:43:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jit-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: Sender: jit-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 66325 invoked by uid 89); 30 Jun 2015 10:43:30 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Checked: by ClamAV 0.98.7 on sourceware.org X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_40,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_40,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on sourceware.org X-Spam-Level: X-HELO: ovh.starynkevitch.net Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2015 00:00:00 -0000 From: Basile Starynkevitch To: David Malcolm Cc: jit@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] jit: add switch statements Message-ID: <20150630104325.GA5719@ovh.starynkevitch.net> References: <558A846C.70003@starynkevitch.net> <1435259621-45194-1-git-send-email-dmalcolm@redhat.com> <1435259621-45194-2-git-send-email-dmalcolm@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1435259621-45194-2-git-send-email-dmalcolm@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SW-Source: 2015-q2/txt/msg00145.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 03:13:41PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote: > Some interpreters/VMs support a switch statement (for example the JVM > has opcodes "lookupswitch" and "tableswitch"). GCC has a set of > optimizations for efficiently handling switch statements, so it makes > sense to directly expose switch statements in the libgccjit API. > > This patch implements a switch statement, but it isn't quite ready for > committing to trunk yet: > Is that patch available (thru git or svn) on some branch? I did not found any *jit* branch on svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches Do you believe it will get into GCC 6 (probably yes)? Do you believe it would get into GCC 5.2 (unfortunately, perhaps no)? Do you think it could easily be backported into GCC 5.x ? Cheers! -- Basile Starynkevitch http://starynkevitch.net/Basile France