On Thu, 24 Apr 2014, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 02/28/14 08:21, Kai Tietz wrote:
> > Hmm, this all reminds me about the approach Andrew Pinski and I came
> > up with two years ago. All in all I think it might be worth to
> > express folding-patterns in a more abstract way. So the md-like Lisp
> > syn
On 03/03/14 07:05, Kai Tietz wrote:
[the possibility to use offline verification tools for the
transforms comes to my mind as well]
This is actually a pretty interesting idea. As it would allow us to
do testing for this area without side-effects by high-level passes,
target-properties, etc
Yea
On 02/28/14 08:21, Kai Tietz wrote:
Hmm, this all reminds me about the approach Andrew Pinski and I came
up with two years ago. All in all I think it might be worth to
express folding-patterns in a more abstract way. So the md-like Lisp
syntax for this seems to be just stringent. We make use
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Mar 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 11 Mar 2014, Marc Glisse wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
> > >
> > > > > How do you handle a
> > > > > transformation that currently tries to recursively fold something
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
How do you handle a
transformation that currently tries to recursively fold something else and
does the main transformation only if that simplified?
And doesn't do t
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > > How do you handle a
> > > transformation that currently tries to recursively fold something else and
> > > does the main transformation only if that simplified?
> >
> > And doesn't do the other folding (b
On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
How do you handle a
transformation that currently tries to recursively fold something else and
does the main transformation only if that simplified?
And doesn't do the other folding (because it's not in the IL literally?)?
Similar to the cst without ov
On Fri, 7 Mar 2014, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2014-03-04 14:14 GMT+01:00 Richard Biener :
> > On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Kai Tietz wrote:
> >
> >> 2014-03-03 12:33 GMT+01:00 Richard Biener :
> >> > On Fri, 28 Feb 2014, Kai Tietz wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hmm, this all reminds me about the approach Andrew Pinski an
2014-03-04 14:14 GMT+01:00 Richard Biener :
> On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Kai Tietz wrote:
>
>> 2014-03-03 12:33 GMT+01:00 Richard Biener :
>> > On Fri, 28 Feb 2014, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hmm, this all reminds me about the approach Andrew Pinski and I came
>> >> up with two years ago.
>> >
>> > You
On Tue, 4 Mar 2014, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > > How do I restrict some subexpression to have
> > > a single use?
> >
> > This kind of restrictions come via the valueize() hook - simply
> > valueize to NULL_TREE to make the match fail (for example
> > SS
On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
How do I restrict some subexpression to have
a single use?
This kind of restrictions come via the valueize() hook - simply
valueize to NULL_TREE to make the match fail (for example
SSA_NAME_OCCURS_IN_ABNORMAL_PHI could be made fail that way).
Shouldn
On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2014-03-03 12:33 GMT+01:00 Richard Biener :
> > On Fri, 28 Feb 2014, Kai Tietz wrote:
> >
> >> Hmm, this all reminds me about the approach Andrew Pinski and I came
> >> up with two years ago.
> >
> > You are talking about the gimple folding interface? Yes,
2014-03-03 12:33 GMT+01:00 Richard Biener :
> On Fri, 28 Feb 2014, Kai Tietz wrote:
>
>> Hmm, this all reminds me about the approach Andrew Pinski and I came
>> up with two years ago.
>
> You are talking about the gimple folding interface? Yes, but it's
> more similar to what I proposed before th
On Fri, 28 Feb 2014, Kai Tietz wrote:
> Hmm, this all reminds me about the approach Andrew Pinski and I came
> up with two years ago.
You are talking about the gimple folding interface? Yes, but it's
more similar to what I proposed before that.
> All in all I think it might be worth to
> exp
On Fri, 28 Feb 2014, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 9:34 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > Comments or suggestions?
>
> On the surface it looks like a nice idea. However, I would like to
> understand the scope of this. Are you thinking of a pattern matcher
> with peephole like a
On Fri, 28 Feb 2014, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Feb 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > I've been hacking on a prototype that generates matching and
> > simplification code from a meta-description. The goal is
> > to provide a single source of transforms currently spread
> > over the compiler
Am 02/27/2014 03:34 PM, schrieb Richard Biener:
I've been hacking on a prototype that generates matching and
simplification code from a meta-description. The goal is
to provide a single source of transforms currently spread
over the compiler, mostly fold-const.c, gimple-fold.c and
tree-ssa-forw
Hmm, this all reminds me about the approach Andrew Pinski and I came
up with two years ago. All in all I think it might be worth to
express folding-patterns in a more abstract way. So the md-like Lisp
syntax for this seems to be just stringent. We make use of such a
script-language already for
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 9:34 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> Comments or suggestions?
On the surface it looks like a nice idea. However, I would like to
understand the scope of this. Are you thinking of a pattern matcher
with peephole like actions? Or would you like to evolve a DSL capable
of wri
On Thu, 27 Feb 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
I've been hacking on a prototype that generates matching and
simplification code from a meta-description. The goal is
to provide a single source of transforms currently spread
over the compiler, mostly fold-const.c, gimple-fold.c and
tree-ssa-forwprop.
On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 15:34 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> I've been hacking on a prototype that generates matching and
> simplification code from a meta-description.
For what it is worth, MELT has a similar feature. http://gcc-melt.org/
regards
--
Basile STARYNKEVITCH http://stary
I've been hacking on a prototype that generates matching and
simplification code from a meta-description. The goal is
to provide a single source of transforms currently spread
over the compiler, mostly fold-const.c, gimple-fold.c and
tree-ssa-forwprop.c. Another goal is to make these transforms
22 matches
Mail list logo
