Compiler: lower level switch #1498
Conversation
| let h = Hashtbl.create 16 in | ||
| Array.iteri | ||
| ~f:(fun i (pc, _) -> | ||
| Hashtbl.replace h pc (i :: (try Hashtbl.find h pc with Not_found -> []))) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@vouillon, how important is the optimization about known_cases ? do we need to restore it ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've tried to restore the optimization but it appears that our test-suite doesn't capture/test this.
Would you be able to contribute an expect test for this ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure it is really useful in practice. It makes the analysis more precise and does not cost much, but it's not clear to me whether it make much of a difference.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Your change looks fine. I need to think of a test.
| case 13: | ||
| switch$0 = 3; break; | ||
| switch$0 = 3; switch$1 = 1; break; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The diff in this file may look like a regression (in term of code size) but it looks much better once rebased on top of #1496
fix #1495