On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 8:23 AM, Lawrence Crowl cr...@googlers.com wrote:
On 10/29/12, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote:
On Oct 29, 2012 Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote:
Just to make sure. Testing on ppc should be fast, for example.
And useless. Your patch does not touch
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 2:17 AM, Bin.Cheng amker.ch...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 8:23 AM, Lawrence Crowl cr...@googlers.com wrote:
On 10/29/12, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote:
On Oct 29, 2012 Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote:
Just to make sure. Testing on ppc
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
Sure. But the point is not to add more. We should mechanically strip
all the #if 0 code from the tree, btw. No point keeping all that
garbage around.
Please
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
Sure. But the point is not to add more. We should mechanically strip
all the #if 0
On 10/30/12, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote:
On Oct 30, 2012 Bin.Cheng amker.ch...@gmail.com wrote:
Just one question: Should we change the name of functions
sbitmap_intersection_of_succs/sbitmap_intersection_of_preds/
sbitmap_union_of_succs/sbitmap_union_of_preds too? It might
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Lawrence Crowl cr...@googlers.com wrote:
The sbitmap non-bool returning bitwise operations have been merged with
the bool versions. Sometimes this merge involved modifying the non-bool
version to compute the bool value, and sometimes modifying bool version to
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Lawrence Crowl cr...@googlers.com wrote:
The sbitmap non-bool returning bitwise operations have been merged with
the bool versions. Sometimes this merge involved modifying the non-bool
On 10/29/12, Richard Biener richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Oct 29, 2012 Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote:
On Oct 25, 2012 Lawrence Crowl cr...@googlers.com wrote:
The sbitmap non-bool returning bitwise operations have been
merged with the bool versions. Sometimes this merge
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Lawrence Crowl cr...@googlers.com wrote:
Okay, but I point out that there is an awful lot of #if 0 code
out there. I would rather have done such removal in a followup
patch.
Sure. But the point is not to add more. We should mechanically strip
all the #if 0
On 10/29/12, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote:
On Oct 29, 2012 Lawrence Crowl cr...@googlers.com wrote:
The sbitmap popcount function is only used in ebitmap, which is
itself not used. If we do anything, removing them might be the
thing to do.
Yes, please.
Separate patch, please.
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
Sure. But the point is not to add more. We should mechanically strip
all the #if 0 code from the tree, btw. No point keeping all that
garbage around.
Please no. A lot (if not most) if the #if 0 code serves as good
documentation for why
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote:
Just to make sure. Testing on ppc should be fast, for example.
And useless. Your patch does not touch ppc.
Diego.
On 10/25/12, Lawrence Crowl cr...@googlers.com wrote:
This patch implements the unification of the *bitmap interfaces as
discussed.
Essentially, we rename ebitmap and sbitmap functions to use the same names
as the bitmap functions. This rename works because we can now overload
on the bitmap
13 matches
Mail list logo
