|[4 earlier articles]|
|Re: genetic compilation Andy.Nisbet@cs.tcd.ie (Dr. Andy Nisbet) (2000-04-01)|
|Re: genetic compilation firstname.lastname@example.org (Jean-Luc Nagel) (2000-04-01)|
|Re: genetic compilation email@example.com (Chris Fraser) (2000-04-01)|
|Re: genetic compilation firstname.lastname@example.org (2000-04-03)|
|Re: genetic compilation email@example.com (2000-04-03)|
|Re: Re: genetic compilation firstname.lastname@example.org (Joachim Durchholz) (2000-04-14)|
|Re: genetic compilation gneuner@dyn.EXTRACT.THIS.com (2000-04-20)|
|From:||gneuner@dyn.EXTRACT.THIS.com (George Neuner)|
|Date:||20 Apr 2000 01:28:42 -0400|
|Organization:||Dynamic ReSolutions, Inc.|
On 14 Apr 2000 23:48:31 -0400, "Joachim Durchholz"
>The story is even worse. Since a few years, microprocessors usually keep
>a record of what branches were taken or not taken in the past, and
>speculatively execute one or the other branch depending on what's
Not to mention the processors that speculatively execute *both*
branches and kill the results of the path not taken. The PowerPC does
this up to 3 levels for unresolved branches - ie. it can follow 8
different execution paths [to some depth] simultaneously.
Dynamic Resolutions, Inc.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.