On 2015/07/30 16:21:27, bbudge wrote:
On 2015/07/30 15:50:39, rossberg wrote:
> On 2015/07/30 15:34:58, adamk wrote:
> > https://codereview.chromium.org/1250733005/diff/230001/src/macros.py
> > File src/macros.py (right):
> >
> >
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/1250733005/diff/230001/src/macros.py#newcode101
> > src/macros.py:101: macro IS_SIMD_VALUE(arg) =
(%_IsSimdValue(arg));
> > On 2015/07/30 15:12:24, rossberg wrote:
> > > I'm surprised this actually works! See above, you should have
written
> > > %IsSimdValue here.
> >
> > Drive-by explanation of why this works: since a recent refactor (by
Sven I
> think
> > it was), the "%_" form works for all runtime calls, and the backends
fall
back
> > to the runtime if they don't have an implementation of a given
intrinsic.
>
> Hm, was there a particular motivation for that change? Seems to make
intent
less
> clear and accidents go unnoticed.
I'd be happy to implement the assembly intrinsic. Is there an example or
some
documentation for the extra work that needs to be done?
Documentation? For V8? Are you sure you have already lowered your
expectations
about V8 far enough? :)
But it should work to follow the model of other such intrinsics, e.g.
ClassOf.
The main annoyance is that you'll have to implement it for all the gazillion
compilers times architectures.
https://codereview.chromium.org/1250733005/
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "v8-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to v8-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
