https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114908
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> --- On Mon, 6 May 2024, mkretz at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114908 > > --- Comment #3 from Matthias Kretz (Vir) <mkretz at gcc dot gnu.org> --- > The stdx::simd implementation in this area is old and mainly tuned to be > correct. I can rewrite the split and concat implementation to use > __builtin_shufflevector (which wasn't available in GCC at the time when I > originally implemented it). Doing so I can resolve this issue. > > How do you want to handle this? Because it would certainly be nice if the > compiler can optimize this in the same way as Clang can. Should I try to come > up with a testcase that doesn't need stdx::simd and then improve stdx::simd > independently? Yes, that would be nice (best the testcase w/o stdx::simd being a C testcase even, no C++ abstraction). I do think stdx::simd should be improved to use __builtin_shufflevector though.
