This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: recent troubles with float vectors & bitwise ops

From: Michael Matz <matz at suse dot de>
To: Paul Brook <paul at codesourcery dot com>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>, bonzini at gnu dot org, tbp <tbptbp at gmail dot com>, Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gmail dot com>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 17:56:25 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: Re: recent troubles with float vectors & bitwise ops
References: <46CBC2E1.1010100@gmail.com> <46CD5FCB.1010806@lu.unisi.ch> <m3lkc26zt0.fsf@localhost.localdomain> <200708231646.17856.paul@codesourcery.com>

Hi,

On Thu, 23 Aug 2007, Paul Brook wrote:

> > There seem to be solid reasons to permit this, and no very strong ones
> > to prohibit it.  We can consider it to be a GNU extension for vectors.
> > Vectors are of course themselves an extension already.
> 
> How are you suggesting it be implemented?
> 
> Will the front/middle-end convert it to (vNsf)((vNsi)a | (vNsi)b), or do all 
> vector backends need to lie about having float vector bitwise operations?

optabs and open-coding on expand when unavailable?  Like other constructs?


Ciao,
Michael.

References:
- recent troubles with float vectors & bitwise ops
  - From: tbp
- Re: recent troubles with float vectors & bitwise ops
  - From: Paolo Bonzini
- Re: recent troubles with float vectors & bitwise ops
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: recent troubles with float vectors & bitwise ops
  - From: Paul Brook

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]