Hi people.
I'd like to propose support for taking the address of code labels, and
supporting variable goto statements.
This is a feature I have found extremely useful, implemented as a GCC
specific extension.
I've used this to get great speedups and simplify code while writing
emulators/vm's. Per
Have you considered how this mechanism should handle crossing of scope
boundaries?
On 28.10.2011 18:30, Manu wrote:
Hi people.
I'd like to propose support for taking the address of code labels, and
supporting variable goto statements.
This is a feature I have found extremely useful, implement
Provided some hairy conditions, the switch instruction will optimize to
a jump table in GCC and probably most C compilers.
In ICC, some static analysis is even used to optimize out the test
before the switch.
In D, final switch might enable such an optimization with statically
checking for o
On 28.10.2011 20:30, Manu wrote:
Hi people.
I'd like to propose support for taking the address of code labels, and
supporting variable goto statements.
This is a feature I have found extremely useful, implemented as a GCC
specific extension.
I've used this to get great speedups and simplify cod
ponce:
> Provided some hairy conditions, the switch instruction will optimize to
> a jump table in GCC and probably most C compilers.
>
> In ICC, some static analysis is even used to optimize out the test
> before the switch.
>
> In D, final switch might enable such an optimization with static
On 28.10.2011 22:57, ponce wrote:
Provided some hairy conditions, the switch instruction will optimize to
a jump table in GCC and probably most C compilers.
They do, you have no guaranties. It will either fly or crawl, depending
on sparseness of values. Even so it *usually* makes table, just
On 28 October 2011 22:16, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
> On 28.10.2011 20:30, Manu wrote:
>
>> Hi people.
>>
>> I'd like to propose support for taking the address of code labels, and
>> supporting variable goto statements.
>> This is a feature I have found extremely useful, implemented as a GCC
>> spe
On 28 October 2011 22:30, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
> On 28.10.2011 22:57, ponce wrote:
>
>> Provided some hairy conditions, the switch instruction will optimize to
>> a jump table in GCC and probably most C compilers.
>>
>>
> They do, you have no guaranties. It will either fly or crawl, depending
On 29.10.2011 3:15, Manu wrote:
This is instruction dispatch, the trick in the branch prediction
that operates on per branch basis, thus single switch-jump based VM
dispatch will mispredict jumps most of the time. I seen claims of up
to 99% on average.
If you place a whole sw
On 29 October 2011 10:55, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
> On 29.10.2011 3:15, Manu wrote:
>
>>
>>This is instruction dispatch, the trick in the branch prediction
>>that operates on per branch basis, thus single switch-jump based VM
>>dispatch will mispredict jumps most of the time. I seen c
On 29.10.2011 15:16, Manu wrote:
On 29 October 2011 10:55, Dmitry Olshansky mailto:dmitry.o...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 29.10.2011 3:15, Manu wrote:
This is instruction dispatch, the trick in the branch prediction
that operates on per branch basis, thus single switch-j
On 10/28/2011 09:30 AM, Manu wrote:
Hi people.
I'd like to propose support for taking the address of code labels, and
supporting variable goto statements.
This is a feature I have found extremely useful, implemented as a GCC
specific extension.
I've used this to get great speedups and simplify
12 matches
Mail list logo
