Ian Lance Taylor wrote on 01/18/07 10:51:
Well, internally, we do have ASSERT_EXPR. It would probably take a
little work to permit the frontends to generate it, but the optimizers
should understand it.
By default, they do not. When I initially implemented VRP, I was adding
ASSERT_EXPRs right
On 18 Jan 2007 10:19:37 -0600, Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Richard Guenther wrote:
|
| > Providing a __builtin_assert () function is still one thing on my
| > TODO, we can
| > derive proper ASSERT_EXPRs from it in VRP even in the -DNDEB
Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Richard Guenther wrote:
|
| > Providing a __builtin_assert () function is still one thing on my
| > TODO, we can
| > derive proper ASSERT_EXPRs from it in VRP even in the -DNDEBUG case.
|
| Great! Certainly could be profitably used in libstdc++.
Indee
On 1/18/07, Robert Dewar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Andrew Haley wrote:
> Ian Lance Taylor writes:
> > Abramo Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > I'd like to know if gcc has implemented some generic way to help
> > > optimizer job by allowing programmers to specify assumptions (or
>
Andrew Haley wrote:
Ian Lance Taylor writes:
> Abramo Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I'd like to know if gcc has implemented some generic way to help
> > optimizer job by allowing programmers to specify assumptions (or
> > constraints).
>
> The answer is no, there is nothing
Richard Guenther wrote:
Providing a __builtin_assert () function is still one thing on my
TODO, we can
derive proper ASSERT_EXPRs from it in VRP even in the -DNDEBUG case.
Great! Certainly could be profitably used in libstdc++.
Paolo.
On 18 Jan 2007 07:51:51 -0800, Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ian Lance Taylor writes:
> > Abramo Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > I'd like to know if gcc has implemented some generic way to help
> > > optimizer job by allo
Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ian Lance Taylor writes:
> > Abramo Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > I'd like to know if gcc has implemented some generic way to help
> > > optimizer job by allowing programmers to specify assumptions (or
> > > constraints).
> >
> >
Ian Lance Taylor writes:
> Abramo Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I'd like to know if gcc has implemented some generic way to help
> > optimizer job by allowing programmers to specify assumptions (or
> > constraints).
>
> The answer is no, there is nothing quite like you describe
Abramo Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'd like to know if gcc has implemented some generic way to help
> optimizer job by allowing programmers to specify assumptions (or
> constraints).
The answer is no, there is nothing quite like you describe.
But I think it would be a good idea.
Ian
I'd like to know if gcc has implemented some generic way to help
optimizer job by allowing programmers to specify assumptions (or
constraints).
This is somewhat different from assertions: suppose we have this simple
code:
#include
int p(int a) {
assert(a > 0);
return a <= 0;
}
Compiling w
11 matches
Mail list logo