On Monday, 23 March 2020 at 18:52:16 UTC, Bruce Carneal wrote:
When speeds are equivalent, or very close, I usually prefer
auto vectorized code to explicit SIMD/__vector code as it's
easier to read. (on the downside you have to guard against
compiler code-gen performance regressions)
One odd
On Saturday, 28 March 2020 at 06:56:14 UTC, Bruce Carneal wrote:
On Saturday, 28 March 2020 at 05:21:14 UTC, Crayo List wrote:
On Monday, 23 March 2020 at 18:52:16 UTC, Bruce Carneal wrote:
[snip]
(on the downside you have to guard against compiler code-gen
performance regressions)
auto ve
On Friday, 24 April 2020 at 04:58:52 UTC, Kaitlyn Emmons wrote:
On Friday, 24 April 2020 at 04:50:12 UTC, Kaitlyn Emmons wrote:
Is it possible on windows to dynamically size fibers?
follow up question, if i allocate way more space for a bunch of
fibers then they need, will the space just get
Are there atomic equivalents of bt(), btc(), bts(), btr() ... etc
from core.bitop?
Thanks
On Tuesday, 11 December 2018 at 01:37:25 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2018 at 23:20:22 UTC, Crayo List wrote:
Are there atomic equivalents of bt(), btc(), bts(), btr() ...
etc from core.bitop?
Those are intrinsics that compile into a single cpu
instruction, so they are pro
