On 21 December 2006 21:54, Ayal Zaks wrote:
>> Something along these lines may be useful to do in the vectorizer when we
>> get code like this: > ((char)x) = ((char)( ((int)((char)x)) <<
>> ((int)c) ) )
>> and don't feel like doing all the unpacking of chars to ints and then
>> packing the ints to chars after the shift. An alternative could be to
>> transform the above pattern to:
>> char_x1 = 0
>> char_x2 = char_x << c
>> char_x = ((int)c < size_of_char) ? char_x2 : char_x1
>> and vectorize that (since we already know how to vectorize selects).
>
> Alternatively, do
> char_c2 = (c < size_of_char ? c : 0)
> char_x2 = char_x << char_c2
> which is like saturating the shift amount.
You don't really mean zero as the third operand of that ternary operator,
you want size_of_char.
cheers,
DaveK
--
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....
