On Aug 30, 2011, at 10:01 AM, Artem Shinkarov wrote:
>>> The patch at the moment lacks of some examples, but mainly it works
>>> fine for me. It would be nice if i386 gurus could look into the way I
>>> am doing the expansion.
>>>
>>> Middle-end parts seems to be more or less fine, they have not changed
>>> much from the previous time.
>>
>> +@code{__builtin_shuffle (vec, mask)} and
>> +@code{__builtin_shuffle (vec0, vec1, mask)}. Both functions construct
>>
>> the latter would be __builtin_shuffle2.
>
> Why??
> That was the syntax we agreed on that elegantly handles both cases in one
> place.
If you're going to add vector shuffling builtins, you might consider adding the
same builtin that clang has for compatibility:
http://clang.llvm.org/docs/LanguageExtensions.html#__builtin_shufflevector
It should be straight-forward to map it into the same IR.
-Chris
