On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 03:38:32PM +, Yuao Ma wrote:
> Hi Jakub,
>
> > Please don't include math.h here.
>
> Done.
>
> > And instead of this line use __builtin_acospi (0.5).
> > and, in dejagnu for runtime tests we prefer __builtin_abort on failure, so
>
> Done.
Oh, one more thing.
signbit
On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 03:04:35PM +, Yuao Ma wrote:
> > I think the __builtin_constant_p(acospi(0.5)) approach is usable, but would
> > be much better done on the lib/target-supports.exp side.
> > So, have foldable_pi_based_trigonometry effective target, which would test
> > if __builtin_const
On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 08:17:46AM +0200, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Hi Yuao,
>
>
> Yuao Ma wrote:
> > >//but the testcases don't seem to be conditionalized on this. Would the
> > >//new tests fail if gcc is built against an insufficiently recent version
> > >//of mpfr,
> …
> > The test case is indee
Hi Yuao,
Yuao Ma wrote:
>//but the testcases don't seem to be conditionalized on this. Would the
>//new tests fail if gcc is built against an insufficiently recent version
>//of mpfr,
…
The test case is indeed conditionalized, though in a different manner
than you
might expect. The condition
On Thu, 2025-06-26 at 17:45 +, Yuao Ma wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This patch, a follow-up to r16-1652-g0606d2b979f401, implements
> middle-end
> optimizations (e.g., constant folding) for our trigonometric pi-based
> function
> built-ins.
>
> This patch is part of
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fo
On Sat, Jun 7, 2025 at 3:56 PM Yuao Ma wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> This patch has been updated to conditionally fold the specified math functions
> only when using MPFR version 4.2.0 or newer.
>
> To accompany this change, the test case now utilizes `__builtin_constant_p` to
> determine whether to exec
Joseph Myers wrote:
On Sun, 1 Jun 2025, Yuao Ma wrote:
For MPFR versions older than 4.2.0, we've included our own folding functions.
I think the normal practice in GCC would be to avoid the optimizations
when the MPFR support is absent, instead of working around the absence
with possibly less a
On Sun, 1 Jun 2025, Yuao Ma wrote:
> For MPFR versions older than 4.2.0, we've included our own folding functions.
I think the normal practice in GCC would be to avoid the optimizations
when the MPFR support is absent, instead of working around the absence
with possibly less accurate implementa
