Marc Glisse <marc.gli...@inria.fr> writes:
> +/* (c ? a : b) op (c ? d : e) --> c ? (a op d) : (b op e) */
> + (simplify
> + (op (vec_cond:s @0 @1 @2) (vec_cond:s @0 @3 @4))
> + (with
> + {
> + tree rhs1, rhs2 = NULL;
> + rhs1 = fold_binary (op, type, @1, @3);
> + if (rhs1 && is_gimple_val (rhs1))
> + rhs2 = fold_binary (op, type, @2, @4);
> + }
> + (if (rhs2 && is_gimple_val (rhs2))
> + (vec_cond @0 { rhs1; } { rhs2; })))))
> +#endif
This one looks dangerous for potentially-trapping ops.
> +/* (v ? w : 0) ? a : b is just (v & w) ? a : b */
> +(simplify
> + (vec_cond (vec_cond:s @0 @3 integer_zerop) @1 @2)
> + (vec_cond (bit_and @0 @3) @1 @2))
Does something check automatically that @0 and @3 have compatible types?
Same question for the later folds.
Thanks,
Richard
