On 2012-12-07 09:00, Marc Glisse wrote: > On Fri, 7 Dec 2012, Richard Henderson wrote: > >> On 2012-12-07 02:49, Marc Glisse wrote: >>> For 2-element vectors, vec_concat does seem more natural than >>> vec_merge. If we chose vec_merge as the canonical representation, we >>> should chose it for setting an element in a vector >>> (ix86_expand_vector_set) everywhere, not just those scalarish >>> operations. >> >> I'd hate to enshrine vec_merge over vec_concat for the benefit of x86, >> and to the detriment of e.g. mips. There are plenty of embedded simd >> implementations that are V2xx only. >> >> If we simply pull the various x86 patterns into one common form, set >> and extract included, does that buy us most of what we'd get for >> playing games in combine? > > I'm sorry, could you be more precise? I don't see clearly what you are > suggesting.
Don't change combine? Have I lost the plot somewhere here? r~
