This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Optimization comparison: 3.3, 3.4, mainline, tree-ssa
- From: Geert Bosch <bosch at gnat dot com>
- To: Uros Bizjak <uros at kss-loka dot si>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu
- Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 11:41:24 -0400
- Subject: Re: Optimization comparison: 3.3, 3.4, mainline, tree-ssa
- References: <40837167.5000902@kss-loka.si>
On Apr 19, 2004, at 02:27, Uros Bizjak wrote:
I would like to ask, if these (somehow complex) functions should be
implemented as inline functions in a compiler provided optimized
header, or as intrinsic functions. For example, asin() and acos()
doesn't have hardware implementation, and because of this, I would
suggest implementing them as inline functions. The same goes for
asinh, acosh, etc... which are even more complex function, and I see
no point to implement them in *.md file.
One thing to consider is that non-C languages, such as Fortran, Ada
and Java, have a need for these functions too. Implementing them as
header inlines would require each language to redo this in a
language-dependent way, resulting in duplicated effort and
more bugs as this stuff is hard to get right.
It seems that it would make sense to have a more generic inline
expansion of these well-known functions at the tree level.
-Geert