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: Removing the use of CONSTRUCTOR for Vectors

From: Chris Lattner <clattner at apple dot com>
To: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 12:02:36 -0700
Subject: Re: Removing the use of CONSTRUCTOR for Vectors
References: <1158470634.2407.27.camel@celery.andrew.com> <D68D930F-3C9F-4A13-A317-DA04FBDA86F6@apple.com> <1158519377.2407.36.camel@celery.andrew.com>

On Sep 17, 2006, at 11:56 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:

On Sun, 2006-09-17 at 10:33 -0700, Chris Lattner wrote:
On Sep 16, 2006, at 10:23 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:

I just got crazy idea, since we really don't like CONSTRUCTOR that much and we already know the lengths of Vectors, we can have a VECTOR_EXPR which we could then use instead of CONSTRUCTORs.
What don't you like about CONSTRUCTOR's?
For memory usage for vector type, they are use too much memory, more
than twice than what is needed for a vector.

Isn't that also true for densely initialized arrays? I'd expect arrays to be far more commonly used than vectors. Why make the new construction specific to vectors?

-Chris

References:
- Removing the use of CONSTRUCTOR for Vectors
  - From: Andrew Pinski
- Re: Removing the use of CONSTRUCTOR for Vectors
  - From: Chris Lattner
- Re: Removing the use of CONSTRUCTOR for Vectors
  - From: Andrew Pinski

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