Steve:
Agreed the documentation only specifies unsigned char argument for the
two built-ins.
Do you think we should add support signed char arguments in addition to
the documented unsigned char arguments?
Do you see any situations where a user might want to to have both signed
and unsigned char arguments for the two built-ins?
Thanks.
Carl
On 8/5/24 2:12 PM, Steven Munroe wrote:
Looking at the latest version of the Power Vector Intrinsic
Programming Reference (Revision 2. 0. 0_prd, Bill slipped this to me
for review), I see that vec_test_lsbb_all_ones vec_test_lsbb_all_zeros
both specify vector unsigned char, only. On
Looking at the latest version of the Power Vector Intrinsic
Programming Reference (Revision 2.0.0_prd, Bill slipped this to me for
review), I see that
vec_test_lsbb_all_ones
vec_test_lsbb_all_zeros
both specify vector unsigned char, only.
On Mon, Aug 5, 2024 at 1:15 AM Kewen.Lin <li...@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
on 2024/8/3 05:48, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On 7/31/24 10:21 PM, Kewen.Lin wrote:
>> on 2024/8/1 01:52, Carl Love wrote:
>>> Yes, I noticed that the built-ins were defined as overloaded
but only had one definition. Did seem odd to me.
>>>
>>>> either is with "vector unsigned char" as argument type, but
the corresponding instance
>>>> prototype in builtin table is with "vector signed char".
It's inconsistent and weird,
>>>> I think we can just update the prototype in builtin table
with "vector unsigned char"
>>>> and remove the entries in overload table. It can be a follow
up patch.
>>>
>>> I didn't notice that it was signed in the instance prototype
but unsigned in the overloaded definition. That is definitely
inconsistent.
>>>
>>> That said, should we just go ahead and support both signed and
unsigned argument versions of the all ones and all zeros built-ins?
>>
>> Good question, I thought about that but found openxl only
supports the unsigned version
>> so I felt it's probably better to keep consistent with it. But
I'm fine for either, if
>> we decide to extend it to cover both signed and unsigned, we
should notify openxl team
>> to extend it as well.
>>
>> openxl doc links:
>>
>>
https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/openxl-c-and-cpp-aix/17.1.2?topic=functions-vec-test-lsbb-all-ones
>>
https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/openxl-c-and-cpp-aix/17.1.2?topic=functions-vec-test-lsbb-all-zeros
>
> If it makes sense to support vector signed char rather than only
the vector unsigned char,
> then I'm fine adding support for it. It almost seems since we
tried adding an overload
> for it, that that was our intention (to support both signed and
unsigned) and we just
> had a bug so only unsigned was supported?
Good question but I'm not sure, it could be an oversight without
adding one more instance
for overloading, or adopting some useless code (only for
overloading) for a single instance.
I found it's introduced by r11-2437-gcf5d0fc2d1adcd, CC'ed Will as
he contributed this.
BR,
Kewen
>
> CC'ing Steve since he noticed the missing documentation when we
was trying to
> use the built-ins. Steve, do you see a need to also support
vector signed char
> with these built-ins?
>
> Peter
>
>
