On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 7:46 PM, Marc Glisse <marc.gli...@inria.fr> wrote:
>>> If this is accepted, I will gladly prepare patches removing the unused >>> builtins and extending this to a few more operations (integer vectors in >>> particular). If this is not the direction we want to go, I'd like to hear it >>> clearly so I can move on... >> >> >> As we discussed offlist, removing all the builtins would be problematic >> for >> Ada as they are the only medium allowing flexible access to vector >> instructions >> (aside autovectorization) for users. >> >> Today, the model is very simple: people who want to build on top of vector >> operations just bind to the builtins they need and expose higher level >> interfaces if they like, provided proper type definitions (see g-sse.ads >> for >> example). > > > It is sad that this prevents us from removing the builtins, but I agree that > we can't just drop ada+sse users like that. Well, less work for me if I > don't have to remove the builtins, and my main motivation is optimization, > even if I tried to sell the clean up to convince people. > > Uros, is it still ok if I change the intrinsics without removing the > builtins? (with testcases for HJ and not before Kirill says it is ok) Given that this will be a substantial work and considering the request from Kirill, what do you think about separate development branch until AVXn stuff is finished? This will give a couple of weeks and a playground to finalize the approach for the conversion. Maybe even ada can be tested there to not regress with the compatibility stuff. Uros.
