This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Patch to define __NO_STRING_INLINES in system.h


Daniel Berlin <dberlin@dberlin.org> writes:
>> insn-recog.c contains a giant decision tree all spelled out in C.
>> Back in 1999 rth and I got about halfway done with a patch to
>> implement it using a bytecode interpreter instead.  This gave ~10x
>> size reduction and no measurable performance difference.  That's the
>> patch I'm working on again now.
>
> When i resurrected this patch a year or so ago  (after you sent it to
> me, if you don't remember), I got it working somewhat, and *did*
> notice a performance difference, so i gave up on it.

I don't believe I heard back from you about it at any point, so I'd
forgotten I'd done that.  A performance difference surprises me - I
couldn't persuade gcc to spend any measurable time in recog() when I
was experimenting with it.  We'll see what happens this time round.

zw


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]