On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 1:34 AM, Paul Brook <p...@codesourcery.com> wrote: >> > In fact we might want to move switch optimization up to the tree level >> > (just because it's way easier to deal with there). Thus, lower switch >> > to a mixture of binary tree & jump-tables (possibly using perfect >> > hashing). >> >> Doing the optimisation at the tree-level was exactly my initial idea. >> By splitting the switches at the tree-level, before expand_case, would >> then allow for expand_case to transform it either to a jump table or >> binary tree depending on the situation. > > I'd kinda hope that doing the optimization at the tree level means expand_case > doesn't have to handle both types. The tree code converts sparse case ranges > to explicit conditionals (or a switch on a compact perfect hash), so anything > left to RTL expansion must be a jump table.
Yes, that was my idea. Richard. > Paul >
