On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 10:23 PM, Dinar Temirbulatov wrote: >> The error in 252.eon was due to incorrect setup. Also "if (count > >> 3*PARAM_VALUE (PARAM_SWITCH_JUMP_TABLES_BB_OPS_LIMIT))" does not look >> correct, and probably it is better to move this code in the earlier >> stage just before the gimple expand and keep preference expand state >> (jump-tables or not) for every switch statement to avoid dealing with >> the RTL altogether. > > Moving switch "expansion" to GIMPLE is an idea that is around since > quite some time. Basically you'd lower switches so that remaining > switch statements directly map to jump-tables only. Steven was working > on this a bit and if I remember correctly 4.8 has some improvements > here in the switch-conversion pass.
Right. I will move switch lowering to GIMPLE for GCC 4.9. Everything not lowered will be expanded as a casesi or tablejump. New methods of lowering switches can be added in the new GIMPLE lowering pass once that's done. Ciao! Steven
