On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 1:25 PM Martin Liška <mli...@suse.cz> wrote: > > On 11/16/20 1:21 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > > but the most trivial thing would be to feed the pass the > > balanced-tree generated by switch expansion where I > > would expect us to be able to detect it as the original switch again. > > Well, if we want to support such matching, then please deffer it to a phase 2. > I don't see it a common pattern that people write such a code in wild.
I didn't expect do actually support the matching just have the code structured in a way to make it easier. I guess it's close enough to go forward with the current scheme though. > Right now, we have some local analysis and one can eventually build a more > advanced > algorithm on top of it. Can we please make a progress for GCC 11 with the > current > approach that will cover quite some interesting if-chains? OK, so can you send an updated patch? Thanks, Richard. > Thanks, > Martin
