Jakub Jelinek writes:
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 02:43:32PM +0100, Michael Matz wrote:
>> > If it's a VEC_PERM_EXPR then it'll be a new form of VEC_PERM_EXPR.
>>
>> No, it'd be a VEC_PERM_EXPR where the magic mask is generated by a new
>> EXPR type, instead of being a mere constant.
>
> Or an int
Michael Matz writes:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 23 Nov 2017, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>
>> > I don't want variable-size vector special-casing everywhere. I want
>> > it to be somehow naturally integrating with existing stuff.
>>
>> It's going to be a special case whatever happens though.
>
> It wouldn't
On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 02:43:32PM +0100, Michael Matz wrote:
> > If it's a VEC_PERM_EXPR then it'll be a new form of VEC_PERM_EXPR.
>
> No, it'd be a VEC_PERM_EXPR where the magic mask is generated by a new
> EXPR type, instead of being a mere constant.
Or an internal function that would produc
Hi,
On Thu, 23 Nov 2017, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> > I don't want variable-size vector special-casing everywhere. I want
> > it to be somehow naturally integrating with existing stuff.
>
> It's going to be a special case whatever happens though.
It wouldn't have to be this way. It's like sa
Richard Biener writes:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
>> Richard Biener writes:
>>> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 1:35 PM, Richard Sandiford
>>> wrote:
Richard Biener writes:
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 12:56 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 11/09/2017 06:24 AM,
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> Richard Biener writes:
>> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 1:35 PM, Richard Sandiford
>> wrote:
>>> Richard Biener writes:
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 12:56 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 11/09/2017 06:24 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> ..
Richard Biener writes:
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 1:35 PM, Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
>> Richard Biener writes:
>>> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 12:56 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 11/09/2017 06:24 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> ...so that we can use them for variable-length vectors. For now
>
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 1:35 PM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> Richard Biener writes:
>> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 12:56 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>> On 11/09/2017 06:24 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
...so that we can use them for variable-length vectors. For now
constant-length vectors continue
Richard Biener writes:
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 12:56 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 11/09/2017 06:24 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>>> ...so that we can use them for variable-length vectors. For now
>>> constant-length vectors continue to use VEC_PERM_EXPR and the
>>> vec_perm_const optab even for c
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 12:56 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 11/09/2017 06:24 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> ...so that we can use them for variable-length vectors. For now
>> constant-length vectors continue to use VEC_PERM_EXPR and the
>> vec_perm_const optab even for cases that the new optabs could
On 11/09/2017 06:24 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> ...so that we can use them for variable-length vectors. For now
> constant-length vectors continue to use VEC_PERM_EXPR and the
> vec_perm_const optab even for cases that the new optabs could
> handle.
>
> The vector optabs are inconsistent about
...so that we can use them for variable-length vectors. For now
constant-length vectors continue to use VEC_PERM_EXPR and the
vec_perm_const optab even for cases that the new optabs could
handle.
The vector optabs are inconsistent about whether there should be
an underscore before the mode part o
12 matches
Mail list logo
