[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ft-devel] Cleaning up ttinterp
From: |
Alexei Podtelezhnikov |
Subject: |
Re: [ft-devel] Cleaning up ttinterp |
Date: |
Tue, 14 Oct 2014 13:43:31 -0400 |
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 7:04 PM, Behdad Esfahbod <address@hidden> wrote:
> I was checking it out today and noticed that there are two main loops: default
> big switch, and non-default function-dispatch array.
Both are likely implemented through jump tables with similar
performance. Whether the switch is faster is not obvious. What is more
readable is a matter of taste. I do not like that some of more
involved Ins_functions remained in your code as others did not. I wish
there were a bit more consistency there. For example, only one liners
are explicitly inlined so that the switch is not bloated.
One relevant discussion among many others on the topic:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5582261/performance-of-array-of-functions-over-if-and-switch-statements
- [ft-devel] Cleaning up ttinterp, Behdad Esfahbod, 2014/10/13
- Re: [ft-devel] Cleaning up ttinterp, Werner LEMBERG, 2014/10/14
- Re: [ft-devel] Cleaning up ttinterp, Alexei Podtelezhnikov, 2014/10/14
- Re: [ft-devel] Cleaning up ttinterp, Behdad Esfahbod, 2014/10/14
- Re: [ft-devel] Cleaning up ttinterp, Werner LEMBERG, 2014/10/15
- Re: [ft-devel] Cleaning up ttinterp, Behdad Esfahbod, 2014/10/15
- Re: [ft-devel] Cleaning up ttinterp, Werner LEMBERG, 2014/10/15
- Re: [ft-devel] Cleaning up ttinterp, Behdad Esfahbod, 2014/10/15
- Re: [ft-devel] Cleaning up ttinterp, Werner LEMBERG, 2014/10/18
- Re: [ft-devel] Cleaning up ttinterp, Behdad Esfahbod, 2014/10/26
Re: [ft-devel] Cleaning up ttinterp,
Alexei Podtelezhnikov <=