Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Does anyone know of a good guide to the MSIL JIT compiler?

Does anyone know of a good guide to the MSIL JIT compiler?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
designdebuggingtutorialquestioncsharp
54 Posts 11 Posters 4 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • H honey the codewitch

    I know how debug information and symbol mapping and such work. What I don't know is if Microsoft does some magic to the JITter in debug to make it produce different code. So I can't rely on that method.

    Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

    T Offline
    T Offline
    trønderen
    wrote on last edited by
    #10

    If I select code generating for 'Any CPU' the main compiler will generate an IL assembly, which is processed by the JITter when the assembly is run for the first time. At the moment, I am running 32 bit CLR, and that jitter generates exactly the same binary code as the 'x86' CPU option. I'd be very surprised if they were different. I'd be very surprised if there were two different x86 code generators. The linkers do completely different jobs, but not the code generators. I do not understand where MS could do some magic that is not visible in the generated code.

    Religious freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make five.

    H 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • H honey the codewitch

      Basically I am not sure about a number of things regarding how it works

      if((this.current >= 'A' && this.current <= 'Z') ||
      (this.current >= 'a' && this.current <= 'z')) {
      // do something
      }

      In MSIL you'd have to pepper the IL you drop for that if construct with a bunch of extra Ldarg_0 arguments to retrieve the this reference for *each* comparison. On x86 CPUs (and well, most any CPU with registers, which IL doesn't really have unless you stretch the terminology to include its list of function arguments and locals) you'd load the this pointer into a register and work off that rather than repeatedly loading it onto the stack every time you need to access it as you would in IL. On pretty much any supporting architecture this is much faster than hitting stack. Maybe an order of magnitude. So my question is for example, is the JIT compiler smart enough to resolve those repeated Ldarg_0s into register access? That's just one thing I want to know. Some avenues of research I considered to figure this out: 1. Running the code through a debugger and dropping to assembly. The only way I can do that reliably is with debug info, which may change how the JITter drops native instructions. I can't rely on it. 2. Using ngen and then disassembling the result but again, that's not JITted, but rather precompiled so things like whole program optimization are in play. I can't rely on it. And I can't find any material that will help me figure that out short of the very dry and difficult specs they release, which I'm not even sure tell me that, since the JIT compiler's actual implementation details aren't part of the standard. What I'm hoping for is something some clever Microsoft employee or blogger wrote that describes the behavior of Microsoft's JITter in some detail. There are some real world implications for some C# code that my library generates. I need to make some decisions about it and I feel like I don't have all the information I need.

      Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

      A Offline
      A Offline
      Amarnath S
      wrote on last edited by
      #11

      Could this be a possible workaround to avoid those extra JIT compiler arguments?

      var cur = this.current;
      if( cur >= 'A' && cur <= 'Z' || cur >= 'a' && cur <= 'z') {
      // do something
      }

      H 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • A Amarnath S

        Could this be a possible workaround to avoid those extra JIT compiler arguments?

        var cur = this.current;
        if( cur >= 'A' && cur <= 'Z' || cur >= 'a' && cur <= 'z') {
        // do something
        }

        H Offline
        H Offline
        honey the codewitch
        wrote on last edited by
        #12

        Not in the instance I'm using it in without a rework. I'd have to change the structure of the code, which is made more complicated by the fact that it's a CodeDOM tree instead of real code. Before I do that, I want to make sure I'm not (A) doing something for nothing, and more importantly (B) introducing clutter or extra overhead in an attempt to optimize. I've included a chunk of the state machine runner code which should illustrate the issue I hope.

        int p;
        int l;
        int c;
        ch = -1;
        this.capture.Clear();
        if ((this.current == -2)) {
        this.Advance();
        }
        p = this.position;
        l = this.line;
        c = this.column;
        // q0:
        // [\t-\n\r ]
        if (((((this.current >= 9)
        && (this.current <= 10))
        || (this.current == 13))
        || (this.current == 32))) {
        this.Advance();
        goto q1;
        }
        // [A-Z_hj-kmqxz]
        if ((((((((((this.current >= 65)
        && (this.current <= 90))
        || (this.current == 95))
        || (this.current == 104))
        || ((this.current >= 106)
        && (this.current <= 107)))
        || (this.current == 109))
        || (this.current == 113))
        || (this.current == 120))
        || (this.current == 122))) {
        this.Advance();
        goto q2;
        }
        // [a]
        if ((this.current == 97)) {
        this.Advance();
        goto q3;
        }
        // [b]
        if ((this.current == 98)) {
        this.Advance();
        goto q22;
        }
        // ...snip...
        q1:
        // [\t-\n\r ]
        if (((((this.current >= 9)
        && (this.current <= 10))
        || (this.current == 13))
        || (this.current == 32))) {
        this.Advance();
        goto q1;
        }
        return FAMatch.Create(2, this.capture.ToString(), p, l, c);
        q2:
        // [0-9A-Z_a-z]
        if ((((((this.current >= 48)
        && (this.current <= 57))
        || ((this.current >= 65)
        && (this.current <= 90)))
        || (this.current == 95))
        || ((this.current >= 97)
        && (this.current <= 122)))) {
        this.Advance();
        goto q2;
        }
        return FAMatch.Create(0, this.capture.ToString(), p, l, c);

        Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • H honey the codewitch

          Basically I am not sure about a number of things regarding how it works

          if((this.current >= 'A' && this.current <= 'Z') ||
          (this.current >= 'a' && this.current <= 'z')) {
          // do something
          }

          In MSIL you'd have to pepper the IL you drop for that if construct with a bunch of extra Ldarg_0 arguments to retrieve the this reference for *each* comparison. On x86 CPUs (and well, most any CPU with registers, which IL doesn't really have unless you stretch the terminology to include its list of function arguments and locals) you'd load the this pointer into a register and work off that rather than repeatedly loading it onto the stack every time you need to access it as you would in IL. On pretty much any supporting architecture this is much faster than hitting stack. Maybe an order of magnitude. So my question is for example, is the JIT compiler smart enough to resolve those repeated Ldarg_0s into register access? That's just one thing I want to know. Some avenues of research I considered to figure this out: 1. Running the code through a debugger and dropping to assembly. The only way I can do that reliably is with debug info, which may change how the JITter drops native instructions. I can't rely on it. 2. Using ngen and then disassembling the result but again, that's not JITted, but rather precompiled so things like whole program optimization are in play. I can't rely on it. And I can't find any material that will help me figure that out short of the very dry and difficult specs they release, which I'm not even sure tell me that, since the JIT compiler's actual implementation details aren't part of the standard. What I'm hoping for is something some clever Microsoft employee or blogger wrote that describes the behavior of Microsoft's JITter in some detail. There are some real world implications for some C# code that my library generates. I need to make some decisions about it and I feel like I don't have all the information I need.

          Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

          1 Offline
          1 Offline
          11917640 Member
          wrote on last edited by
          #13

          Don't expect to see any optimizations in MSIL code, even in Release configuration. They are done by JIT-compiler, and may be more effective, since exact CPU type is known at runtime. You may try to see optimized real Assembly code, but this is difficult task, since there is huge distance from the source C# code and MSIL to machine language instructions.

          H 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • 1 11917640 Member

            Don't expect to see any optimizations in MSIL code, even in Release configuration. They are done by JIT-compiler, and may be more effective, since exact CPU type is known at runtime. You may try to see optimized real Assembly code, but this is difficult task, since there is huge distance from the source C# code and MSIL to machine language instructions.

            H Offline
            H Offline
            honey the codewitch
            wrote on last edited by
            #14

            I'm aware of that. I am generating MSIL instructions using Reflection Emit as part of my project. The other part generates source code. I would like to ensure that this source code generates IL that will be then be optimized appropriately by the JITter. If not, I will generate the source code differently, but my interest is in post-jitted code. Not the IL.

            Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

            1 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • T trønderen

              If I select code generating for 'Any CPU' the main compiler will generate an IL assembly, which is processed by the JITter when the assembly is run for the first time. At the moment, I am running 32 bit CLR, and that jitter generates exactly the same binary code as the 'x86' CPU option. I'd be very surprised if they were different. I'd be very surprised if there were two different x86 code generators. The linkers do completely different jobs, but not the code generators. I do not understand where MS could do some magic that is not visible in the generated code.

              Religious freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make five.

              H Offline
              H Offline
              honey the codewitch
              wrote on last edited by
              #15

              That seems to be assuming more than I am usually comfortable with when it comes to MS. I've worked at Microsoft and with Microsoft code enough to expect the unexpected deep in the bowels of their frameworks. You should have seen me wrestle with the some less oft used typelib generation functions in oleaut32.dll. I was working there at the time, and nobody could answer me about what the heck they were doing. If they made the JITter produce different code for debug builds than release, it would be totally on brand for them, is what I'm saying, no matter if it's not intuitive. You can't put anything past these people. You really can't. And I know those are names, but Debug generates debug symbols and such. Does the jitter for example? do something different if a pdb is present? Or some other magic signaled by the linker dropping some flag in the binary's metadata? Probably not. "Probably" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.

              Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • H honey the codewitch

                I'm aware of that. I am generating MSIL instructions using Reflection Emit as part of my project. The other part generates source code. I would like to ensure that this source code generates IL that will be then be optimized appropriately by the JITter. If not, I will generate the source code differently, but my interest is in post-jitted code. Not the IL.

                Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

                1 Offline
                1 Offline
                11917640 Member
                wrote on last edited by
                #16

                "

                Quote:

                Running the code through a debugger and dropping to assembly. The only way I can do that reliably is with debug info, which may change how the JITter drops native instructions. I can't rely on it.

                Probably, the answer is here: Do PDB Files Affect Performance? Generally, the answer is: No. Debugging information is just additional file, which helps debugger to match the native instructions and source code. Of course, if implemented correctly. The article is written by John Robbins.

                H 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • 1 11917640 Member

                  "

                  Quote:

                  Running the code through a debugger and dropping to assembly. The only way I can do that reliably is with debug info, which may change how the JITter drops native instructions. I can't rely on it.

                  Probably, the answer is here: Do PDB Files Affect Performance? Generally, the answer is: No. Debugging information is just additional file, which helps debugger to match the native instructions and source code. Of course, if implemented correctly. The article is written by John Robbins.

                  H Offline
                  H Offline
                  honey the codewitch
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #17

                  I think that's about unmanaged code, and not the JITter

                  Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

                  1 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • H honey the codewitch

                    I think that's about unmanaged code, and not the JITter

                    Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

                    1 Offline
                    1 Offline
                    11917640 Member
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #18

                    Well, buzzwords like .NET, VB .NET, C#, JIT compiler, ILDASM are used in this article only by accident. You are right.

                    H 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • 1 11917640 Member

                      Well, buzzwords like .NET, VB .NET, C#, JIT compiler, ILDASM are used in this article only by accident. You are right.

                      H Offline
                      H Offline
                      honey the codewitch
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #19

                      I am tired and I read the first bit of it. Sorry. It's 3am here and I shouldn't be awake.

                      Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • H honey the codewitch

                        Basically I am not sure about a number of things regarding how it works

                        if((this.current >= 'A' && this.current <= 'Z') ||
                        (this.current >= 'a' && this.current <= 'z')) {
                        // do something
                        }

                        In MSIL you'd have to pepper the IL you drop for that if construct with a bunch of extra Ldarg_0 arguments to retrieve the this reference for *each* comparison. On x86 CPUs (and well, most any CPU with registers, which IL doesn't really have unless you stretch the terminology to include its list of function arguments and locals) you'd load the this pointer into a register and work off that rather than repeatedly loading it onto the stack every time you need to access it as you would in IL. On pretty much any supporting architecture this is much faster than hitting stack. Maybe an order of magnitude. So my question is for example, is the JIT compiler smart enough to resolve those repeated Ldarg_0s into register access? That's just one thing I want to know. Some avenues of research I considered to figure this out: 1. Running the code through a debugger and dropping to assembly. The only way I can do that reliably is with debug info, which may change how the JITter drops native instructions. I can't rely on it. 2. Using ngen and then disassembling the result but again, that's not JITted, but rather precompiled so things like whole program optimization are in play. I can't rely on it. And I can't find any material that will help me figure that out short of the very dry and difficult specs they release, which I'm not even sure tell me that, since the JIT compiler's actual implementation details aren't part of the standard. What I'm hoping for is something some clever Microsoft employee or blogger wrote that describes the behavior of Microsoft's JITter in some detail. There are some real world implications for some C# code that my library generates. I need to make some decisions about it and I feel like I don't have all the information I need.

                        Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

                        J Offline
                        J Offline
                        Jacquers
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #20

                        Wouldn't the Rosslyn compiler stuff be a good place to look? It's open source afaik.

                        H 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • H honey the codewitch

                          Basically I am not sure about a number of things regarding how it works

                          if((this.current >= 'A' && this.current <= 'Z') ||
                          (this.current >= 'a' && this.current <= 'z')) {
                          // do something
                          }

                          In MSIL you'd have to pepper the IL you drop for that if construct with a bunch of extra Ldarg_0 arguments to retrieve the this reference for *each* comparison. On x86 CPUs (and well, most any CPU with registers, which IL doesn't really have unless you stretch the terminology to include its list of function arguments and locals) you'd load the this pointer into a register and work off that rather than repeatedly loading it onto the stack every time you need to access it as you would in IL. On pretty much any supporting architecture this is much faster than hitting stack. Maybe an order of magnitude. So my question is for example, is the JIT compiler smart enough to resolve those repeated Ldarg_0s into register access? That's just one thing I want to know. Some avenues of research I considered to figure this out: 1. Running the code through a debugger and dropping to assembly. The only way I can do that reliably is with debug info, which may change how the JITter drops native instructions. I can't rely on it. 2. Using ngen and then disassembling the result but again, that's not JITted, but rather precompiled so things like whole program optimization are in play. I can't rely on it. And I can't find any material that will help me figure that out short of the very dry and difficult specs they release, which I'm not even sure tell me that, since the JIT compiler's actual implementation details aren't part of the standard. What I'm hoping for is something some clever Microsoft employee or blogger wrote that describes the behavior of Microsoft's JITter in some detail. There are some real world implications for some C# code that my library generates. I need to make some decisions about it and I feel like I don't have all the information I need.

                          Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

                          S Offline
                          S Offline
                          Simbosan
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #21

                          Even if it did, I wouldn't assume that it always would and would do so on all systems. I would code explicitly and not use behaviour that isn't part of the doco.

                          H 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • S Simbosan

                            Even if it did, I wouldn't assume that it always would and would do so on all systems. I would code explicitly and not use behaviour that isn't part of the doco.

                            H Offline
                            H Offline
                            honey the codewitch
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #22

                            Well, I didn't ask you what you would do. And this isn't bizdev

                            Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

                            T 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • J Jacquers

                              Wouldn't the Rosslyn compiler stuff be a good place to look? It's open source afaik.

                              H Offline
                              H Offline
                              honey the codewitch
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #23

                              Probably not, since at best it uses Emit facilities and has nothing to do with the final JITter output

                              Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

                              S 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • H honey the codewitch

                                Probably not, since at best it uses Emit facilities and has nothing to do with the final JITter output

                                Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

                                S Offline
                                S Offline
                                Stuart Dootson
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #24

                                The JIT (as well as the rest of the runtime) is also [open source](https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/tree/main/src/coreclr/jit) - there's an `optimizer.cpp` in that directory, which might be of interest. Also in that directory is a file (`viewing-jit-dumps.md`) which talks about looking at disassembly, and also mentions [a Visual Studio plugin, Disasmo](https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=EgorBogatov.Disasmo), that simplifies this process. [Edit]Another option - use Godbolt - [it supports C#](https://godbolt.org/z/vnqvGdqfe)![/Edit]

                                Java, Basic, who cares - it's all a bunch of tree-hugging hippy cr*p

                                H 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • H honey the codewitch

                                  Basically I am not sure about a number of things regarding how it works

                                  if((this.current >= 'A' && this.current <= 'Z') ||
                                  (this.current >= 'a' && this.current <= 'z')) {
                                  // do something
                                  }

                                  In MSIL you'd have to pepper the IL you drop for that if construct with a bunch of extra Ldarg_0 arguments to retrieve the this reference for *each* comparison. On x86 CPUs (and well, most any CPU with registers, which IL doesn't really have unless you stretch the terminology to include its list of function arguments and locals) you'd load the this pointer into a register and work off that rather than repeatedly loading it onto the stack every time you need to access it as you would in IL. On pretty much any supporting architecture this is much faster than hitting stack. Maybe an order of magnitude. So my question is for example, is the JIT compiler smart enough to resolve those repeated Ldarg_0s into register access? That's just one thing I want to know. Some avenues of research I considered to figure this out: 1. Running the code through a debugger and dropping to assembly. The only way I can do that reliably is with debug info, which may change how the JITter drops native instructions. I can't rely on it. 2. Using ngen and then disassembling the result but again, that's not JITted, but rather precompiled so things like whole program optimization are in play. I can't rely on it. And I can't find any material that will help me figure that out short of the very dry and difficult specs they release, which I'm not even sure tell me that, since the JIT compiler's actual implementation details aren't part of the standard. What I'm hoping for is something some clever Microsoft employee or blogger wrote that describes the behavior of Microsoft's JITter in some detail. There are some real world implications for some C# code that my library generates. I need to make some decisions about it and I feel like I don't have all the information I need.

                                  Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

                                  C Offline
                                  C Offline
                                  Chris Copeland
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #25

                                  Why not download ILSpy[^] and nosey at the produced IL code? Just compile your application in release mode and take a look at the produced IL to see whether it's been optimised. I would hazard a guess that it probably doesn't optimise something like that, but I could be wrong!

                                  [ MQ | Tor.NET | Mimick ]

                                  H 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • C Chris Copeland

                                    Why not download ILSpy[^] and nosey at the produced IL code? Just compile your application in release mode and take a look at the produced IL to see whether it's been optimised. I would hazard a guess that it probably doesn't optimise something like that, but I could be wrong!

                                    [ MQ | Tor.NET | Mimick ]

                                    H Offline
                                    H Offline
                                    honey the codewitch
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #26

                                    Because I'm not interested in the IL code, but in the post jitted native code.

                                    Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

                                    T 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • S Stuart Dootson

                                      The JIT (as well as the rest of the runtime) is also [open source](https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/tree/main/src/coreclr/jit) - there's an `optimizer.cpp` in that directory, which might be of interest. Also in that directory is a file (`viewing-jit-dumps.md`) which talks about looking at disassembly, and also mentions [a Visual Studio plugin, Disasmo](https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=EgorBogatov.Disasmo), that simplifies this process. [Edit]Another option - use Godbolt - [it supports C#](https://godbolt.org/z/vnqvGdqfe)![/Edit]

                                      Java, Basic, who cares - it's all a bunch of tree-hugging hippy cr*p

                                      H Offline
                                      H Offline
                                      honey the codewitch
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #27

                                      Oh wow. I learned two new things from your post. Thanks! Will check that out.

                                      Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • H honey the codewitch

                                        Basically I am not sure about a number of things regarding how it works

                                        if((this.current >= 'A' && this.current <= 'Z') ||
                                        (this.current >= 'a' && this.current <= 'z')) {
                                        // do something
                                        }

                                        In MSIL you'd have to pepper the IL you drop for that if construct with a bunch of extra Ldarg_0 arguments to retrieve the this reference for *each* comparison. On x86 CPUs (and well, most any CPU with registers, which IL doesn't really have unless you stretch the terminology to include its list of function arguments and locals) you'd load the this pointer into a register and work off that rather than repeatedly loading it onto the stack every time you need to access it as you would in IL. On pretty much any supporting architecture this is much faster than hitting stack. Maybe an order of magnitude. So my question is for example, is the JIT compiler smart enough to resolve those repeated Ldarg_0s into register access? That's just one thing I want to know. Some avenues of research I considered to figure this out: 1. Running the code through a debugger and dropping to assembly. The only way I can do that reliably is with debug info, which may change how the JITter drops native instructions. I can't rely on it. 2. Using ngen and then disassembling the result but again, that's not JITted, but rather precompiled so things like whole program optimization are in play. I can't rely on it. And I can't find any material that will help me figure that out short of the very dry and difficult specs they release, which I'm not even sure tell me that, since the JIT compiler's actual implementation details aren't part of the standard. What I'm hoping for is something some clever Microsoft employee or blogger wrote that describes the behavior of Microsoft's JITter in some detail. There are some real world implications for some C# code that my library generates. I need to make some decisions about it and I feel like I don't have all the information I need.

                                        Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

                                        J Offline
                                        J Offline
                                        jschell
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #28

                                        "real world implications for some C# code that my library generates" I don't think this is a good line of research for that reason. They will change the JIT in the future. I wouldn't be surprised if there are minor version updates that change how it works. So how are you going to validate that optimizations that you put into place for one single version will continue to be valid for every version in the future and in the past?

                                        H 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • J jschell

                                          "real world implications for some C# code that my library generates" I don't think this is a good line of research for that reason. They will change the JIT in the future. I wouldn't be surprised if there are minor version updates that change how it works. So how are you going to validate that optimizations that you put into place for one single version will continue to be valid for every version in the future and in the past?

                                          H Offline
                                          H Offline
                                          honey the codewitch
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #29

                                          If it's such a significant difference in the generated code then yes. Especially because in the case I outlined (turns out it does register access after all though) it would require relatively minor adjustments to my generated code to avoid that potential performance pitfall, and do so without significantly impacting readability. I don't like to wait around and hope that Microsoft will one day do the right thing. I've worked there.

                                          Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

                                          T J 2 Replies Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups