On 2013/12/10 14:27:08, titzer wrote:
https://codereview.chromium.org/110123002/diff/20001/src/hydrogen.cc
File src/hydrogen.cc (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/110123002/diff/20001/src/hydrogen.cc#newcode4174
src/hydrogen.cc:4174: for (int i = 0; i < clause_count; ++i) {
It seems like this loop can be rewritten to go over the clauses once,
generating
the compares and the body blocks in one pass. If so, then we can get rid
of
this
body_blocks array altogether.
https://codereview.chromium.org/110123002/diff/20001/test/mjsunit/switch-opt.js
File test/mjsunit/switch-opt.js (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/110123002/diff/20001/test/mjsunit/switch-opt.js#newcode40
test/mjsunit/switch-opt.js:40:
I would like to see several more tests for this optimization, as there
seem to
be many things that can go wrong. E.g. this test doesn't even have any
fallthrough between blocks.
I would have more confidence if I saw ~10 or more different switch
statements
in
this test.
LGTM
But please don't land until after the Chrome branch.
https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/110123002/
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "v8-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
