On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 5:59 AM, camper <[email protected]> wrote:
> Am 30.01.2013 14:41, schrieb Luca Barbato:
>> On 30/01/13 14:30, Benjamin Larsson wrote:
>>> On 01/30/2013 12:13 PM, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Benjamin Larsson
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> On 01/29/2013 10:13 PM, Diego Biurrun wrote:
>>>>>> This avoids SIMD-optimized functions having to sign-extend their
>>>>>> line size argument manually to be able to do pointer arithmetic.
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> This is ugly and obfuscating.
>>>> I have a hard time to follow your reasoning. Please elaborate.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Using a pointer difference type when you express a simple size.
>> That simple size is a pointer difference. It can be a negative a size
>> can't be negative. So it is clarifying its usage after all.
>>
> I'd like to point out that this interfers with x32 - porting. Since
> there ptrdiff_t is still only 32 bits, while
> effective addresses are best done using 64 bits (requiring an adress
> size override otherwise = greater
> code size).

Since you mentioned even gcc does not yet do this correctly, I'm not
sure it's worth holding up all of this for the sake of a ABI that is
still effectively in alpha testing.

Jason
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel

Reply via email to