Chris Lattner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Aug 24, 2007, at 8:02 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > > Permitting this extension continues the preexisting behaviour, and it > > helps programmers and helps existing code. Who does it hurt to permit > > this extension? Who does it help to forbid this extension? > > Aren't builtins the designated way to access processor-specific > features like this? Why does there have to be C operators for > obscure features like this?
A fair question, but we've already decided to support vector + vector and such operations, and we've decided that that is one valid way to generate vector instructions. That decision may itself have been a mistake. But once we accept that decision, then, given that we know that the processor supports bitwise-or on floating point values, using a instruction different from that for bitwise-or on integer values, then it is fair to ask why we don't support vector | vector for floating point vectors. > Wouldn't it be better to fix the code generator to do the right thing > regardless of how the user presents it? There is a lot of code that > uses casts (including the builtin implementations themselves) - it > seems worthwhile to generate instructions for the right domain for > this code as well. I completely agree. Ian
