> 
> hah, that's another issue. But assuming that it was not,
> what good reason do I have to not write a VHPIDIRECT-based
> package with these essential operations ?
> Has anybody done it before ?
> Could there be (later) a patch to GHDL that provides AND/OR/XOR
> to integers so GCC does not have to make a function call
> just of one boolean instruction ? (that would have to be

STOP DOING THIS KIND OF OPTIMISATION

The layer2/gimple step of gcc is rearranging the code according with the
target processor. The final is not the one you think. For instance a one
line function can be automatically inlined, or a loop from 1 to ( static )
5 can be converted into a copied and pasted code.

By this way the code should stay readable and standard, the compiler is
doing the relevant optimisations.

std_logic based and "arithmetic_based" ( signed, unsigned ) should stay as
two separated types ( with casts ). std_logic have 9 states for the low
level engineering, that already makes things complex for simple logic
functions. The arithmetic based should handle all the arithmetics
considerations, that make some complexity. We can not handle the product of
all combinaisons.



> enabled with a pragma or command line option of course,
> to not mess with existing code bases)
> 


_______________________________________________
Ghdl-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/ghdl-discuss

Reply via email to