Re: questions about "find_if_case"

> It avoids a branch instruction. For the first case, the path via "x = > a" is "test -> jump -> set -> jump" (where "set" is th "x = > a"-instruction). This becomes "set -> test -> jump". So one jump > less. Thank you very much for the detailed explanation. However, I have a doubt here. IMO, t

Re: questions about "find_if_case"

On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 8:54 AM, Eric Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > For if-conversion pass (pass_if_after_combine), we can see there're > some IF-THEN-ELSE cases which we try to transform. Let's say > find_if_case_1, for an example. > > (1) >if (test) goto over; // x not l

questions about "find_if_case"

Hi, For if-conversion pass (pass_if_after_combine), we can see there're some IF-THEN-ELSE cases which we try to transform. Let's say find_if_case_1, for an example. (1) if (test) goto over; // x not live x = a; goto label; over: becomes x = a;