On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Mathieu Lacage <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 2010-08-12 at 10:06 +0200, Andrea Canciani wrote: > >> >> (I would *really* love if int128_t was actually available!) >> > >> > It's available on most 64bit systems (at least x86_64) with gcc as >> > __int128_t and __uint128_t. I use this: >> > >> > #if defined(HAVE___UINT128_T) and !defined(HAVE_UINT128_T) >> > typedef __uint128_t uint128_t; >> > typedef __int128_t int128_t; >> > #endif >> If we can't assume that we have a (fast) FPU, we probably can't assume >> that we are on a 64 bits architecture (even less on x86_64). >> :( > > Of course, but this is going to give you a baseline against which you > can compare other implementations. I have found this most useful in my > own projects. Uhmm... I made the thread topic diverge... Anyway, I just pushed my branches. More details in https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29470 Can somebody without an FPU try those branches? I'll add the code needed for architectures without __int128_t ASAP. Andrea _______________________________________________ Pixman mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pixman
