On Mon, 21 Mar 2016, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2016-03-20 12:14:49 +0100, Marc Glisse wrote:
but it seems likely that a user who went to the trouble of disabling
assembly for GMP doesn't want to use that same assembly in MPFR.
I'm not so sure about that. AFAIK, longlong.h has far less asm code
than the whole GMP. So, it is less likely that a user would want to
disable asm from MPFR's copy of longlong.h.
In https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69134 (
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/msg00127.html ), users
specifically wanted to disable MPFR's copy ;-)
On the other hand, MPFR could probably add a --disable-assembly
configure flag to define NO_ASM, so the user would just have to pass
the same option to MPFR that he already passed to GMP.
I don't think that such an option would really be useful (unless
there is a demand for it). The user could still pass -DNO_ASM in
CFLAGS. The drawback is that the user won't benefit from the default
CFLAGS, but if he wants -DNO_ASM, this is quite specific so that he
may not need the default CFLAGS anyway.
Ok. I guess I saw --disable-assembly mostly as a way to document this, but
probably NO_ASM is not worth documenting in MPFR.
--
Marc Glisse
_______________________________________________
gmp-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://gmplib.org/mailman/listinfo/gmp-devel
