On Thu, 29 Nov 2018, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 10:31:06AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 10:22:15AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > OK. I didn't spent a lot of time trying to see if we can merge the
> > > scalar and vector variants but I trust you
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 10:31:06AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 10:22:15AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > OK. I didn't spent a lot of time trying to see if we can merge the
> > scalar and vector variants but I trust you did ;)
>
> Yeah, sadly it is too different, even
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 10:22:15AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> OK. I didn't spent a lot of time trying to see if we can merge the
> scalar and vector variants but I trust you did ;)
Yeah, sadly it is too different, even if we were to introduce a predicate
whether a tree is either INTEGER_CST,
On Thu, 29 Nov 2018, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> The following patch adapts a couple of scalar comparison against INTEGER_CST
> optimizations to vector comparison against uniform_vector_p VECTOR_CST.
>
> The PR was specifically asking for the a > INT_MAX, a >= INT_MAX etc.
> to (signed) a <
Hi!
The following patch adapts a couple of scalar comparison against INTEGER_CST
optimizations to vector comparison against uniform_vector_p VECTOR_CST.
The PR was specifically asking for the a > INT_MAX, a >= INT_MAX etc.
to (signed) a < 0, the first two hunks are prerequsites of that though
in
