Hi Tobias,
thank you for all your comments! I've tried to consider them in the
improved version of my proposal, which can be found at the following
link
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2Wloo-931AoeUlYOHhETVBvY3M/edit?usp=sharing
.
> - In unreleased isl 0.13.0, support for compute out feature
I haven't found information about this feature and isl 0.13.0. Could
you please give me a link to be referred to in the proposal?
> - Improved code generation quality
I also haven't found code quality comparison between CLooG and ISL
code generator. Do you mean, that ISL code generator can improve code
quality with unrolling, full/partial tile separation, fine-grained
code size adjustments?
> - "New internal representaion will be generated by ISL. Its structure is
> planned to be similar to the CLAST tree, but can be changed ..."
>
> What does this mean? The isl_ast representation is already defined. Are you
> saying that isl may generate an ast that is different in structure to the
> clast tree currently generated? Or are you saying we
> still need to define the isl_ast and its nodes itself?
I wanted to say that ISL will generate ISL AST from the polyhedral
representation. This ISL AST (with pointers to original basic blocks
instead of statments) will be internal representation for Graphite,
that should be traversed and transformed into the GIMPLE CFG. I
eliminated the mention of this internal representation in the improved
version of the proposal.
--
Cheers, Roman Gareev
