------- Additional Comments From dorit at il dot ibm dot com  2005-02-12 20:38 
-------
> Well, we don't vectorize any loops as of today either...  Sigh.

(just fyi:) I just checked on powerpc-darwin (but with NAG as fortran FE, not 
gfortran), and these were reported as vectorized:

beam.022195.c.t53.vect:beam.f90:946: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
beam.022195.c.t53.vect:beam.f90:934: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
beam.022195.c.t53.vect:beam.f90:1004: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
beam.022195.c.t53.vect:beam.f90:992: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
fma1.022301.c.t53.vect:fma1.f90:701: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
fma1.022301.c.t53.vect:fma1.f90:702: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
fma1.022301.c.t53.vect:fma1.f90:703: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
fma1.022301.c.t53.vect:fma1.f90:704: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
fma1.022301.c.t53.vect:fma1.f90:705: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
fma1.022301.c.t53.vect:fma1.f90:706: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
fma1.022301.c.t53.vect:fma1.f90:715: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
fma1.022301.c.t53.vect:fma1.f90:716: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
fma1.022301.c.t53.vect:fma1.f90:717: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
fma1.022301.c.t53.vect:fma1.f90:718: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
fma1.022301.c.t53.vect:fma1.f90:719: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
fma1.022301.c.t53.vect:fma1.f90:720: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
fma2.022632.c.t53.vect:fma2.f90:5667: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
partition.022706.c.t53.vect:partition.f90:975: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
partition.022706.c.t53.vect:partition.f90:976: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
partition.022706.c.t53.vect:partition.f90:977: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
partition.022706.c.t53.vect:partition.f90:877: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
strain.022728.c.t53.vect:strain.f90:99: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
strain.022728.c.t53.vect:strain.f90:172: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
strain.022728.c.t53.vect:strain.f90:163: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
strain.022728.c.t53.vect:strain.f90:156: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
strain.022728.c.t53.vect:strain.f90:237: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
strain.022728.c.t53.vect:strain.f90:232: note: LOOP VECTORIZED.
strain.022728.c.t53.vect:strain.f90:227: note: LOOP VECTORIZED. 


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19623

Reply via email to