On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 10:54 PM, Kenneth Zadeck
zad...@naturalbridge.com wrote:
Richard,
i pulled these two frags out of your comments because i wanted to get some
input from you on it while i addressed the other issues you raised.
+ enum SignOp {
+/* Many of the math functions
On 04/19/2013 09:31 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
+ number of elements of the vector that are in use. When LEN *
+ HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT the precision, the value has been
+ compressed. The values of the elements of the vector greater than
+ LEN - 1. are all equal to the highest order bit
Richard Biener richard.guent...@gmail.com writes:
At the rtl level your idea does not work. rtl constants do not have a mode
or type.
Which is not true and does not matter. I tell you why. Quote:
It _is_ true, as long as you read rtl constants as rtl integer constants :-)
+#if
Richard Sandiford rdsandif...@googlemail.com wrote:
Richard Biener richard.guent...@gmail.com writes:
At the rtl level your idea does not work. rtl constants do not
have a mode
or type.
Which is not true and does not matter. I tell you why. Quote:
It _is_ true, as long as you read rtl
Richard Biener richard.guent...@gmail.com writes:
Richard Sandiford rdsandif...@googlemail.com wrote:
Richard Biener richard.guent...@gmail.com writes:
At the rtl level your idea does not work. rtl constants do not
have a mode
or type.
Which is not true and does not matter. I tell you why.
On 04/22/2013 08:20 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
That said, a lot of my pushback is because I feel a little lonesome in this
wide-int review and don't want to lone-some decide about that (generic)
interface part as well.
yeh, now sandiford is back from vacation so there are two of us to beat
on
Richard,
i pulled these two frags out of your comments because i wanted to get
some input from you on it while i addressed the other issues you raised.
+ enum SignOp {
+/* Many of the math functions produce different results depending
+ on if they are SIGNED or UNSIGNED. In
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Kenneth Zadeck
zad...@naturalbridge.com wrote:
Richard,
I made major changes to wide-int along the lines you suggested. Each of the
binary operations is now a template.
There are 5 possible implementations of those operations, one for each of
HWI, unsigned
On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 2:34 PM, Kenneth Zadeck zad...@naturalbridge.com wrote:
Richard,
There has been something that has bothered me about you proposal for the
storage manager and i think i can now characterize that problem. Say i want
to compute the expression
(a + b) / c
converting
Richard,
There has been something that has bothered me about you proposal for the
storage manager and i think i can now characterize that problem. Say i
want to compute the expression
(a + b) / c
converting from tree values, using wide-int as the engine and then
storing the result in a
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 6:16 PM, Kenneth Zadeck zad...@naturalbridge.com wrote:
On 04/03/2013 09:53 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Kenneth Zadeck zad...@naturalbridge.com
wrote:
On 04/03/2013 05:17 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
In the end you will have a variable-size
On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Kenneth Zadeck zad...@naturalbridge.com wrote:
Yes, I agree that you win the challenge that it can be done.What you
have always failed to address is why anyone would want to do this. Or how
this would at all be desirable.But I completely agree that from
On 04/03/2013 05:17 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
In the end you will have a variable-size storage in TREE_INT_CST thus
you will have at least to emit _code_ copying over meta-data and data
from the tree representation to the wide-int (similar for RTX CONST_DOUBLE/INT).
I'm objecting to the amount
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Kenneth Zadeck zad...@naturalbridge.com wrote:
On 04/03/2013 05:17 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
In the end you will have a variable-size storage in TREE_INT_CST thus
you will have at least to emit _code_ copying over meta-data and data
from the tree
On 04/03/2013 09:53 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Kenneth Zadeck zad...@naturalbridge.com wrote:
On 04/03/2013 05:17 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
In the end you will have a variable-size storage in TREE_INT_CST thus
you will have at least to emit _code_ copying over
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 2:59 AM, Kenneth Zadeck
zad...@naturalbridge.com wrote:
This patch contains a large number of the changes requested by Richi. It
does not contain any of the changes that he requested to abstract the
storage layer. That suggestion appears to be quite unworkable.
I of
Yes, I agree that you win the challenge that it can be done.What you
have always failed to address is why anyone would want to do this. Or
how this would at all be desirable.But I completely agree that from
a purely abstract point of view you can add a storage model.
Now here is why
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 2:59 AM, Kenneth Zadeck
zad...@naturalbridge.com wrote:
This patch contains a large number of the changes requested by Richi. It
does not contain any of the changes that he requested to abstract the
storage layer. That suggestion appears to be quite unworkable.
I
18 matches
Mail list logo
