jhuber6 wrote: > I don't really mind what they're called. As I said in the original RFC and PR > that introduced the builtins, I have no particular favourites. > > However, do note that the elementwise builtins are not _exactly_ like > clzg/ctzg in that they don't have _target-specific_ zero-is-undef behaviour - > it's unconditionally zero-is-undef. That's perhaps one of the (few) arguments > for naming them differently. > > This PR should also update libclc which is using these builtins.
To me, maybe undefined is roughly equivalent to undefined in practice, so I think they're still more or less the same for the targets that people are more familiar with. Changes the libclc uses. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157128 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
