On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Alan Lawrence wrote:
> Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>>
>> scalar_reduc_to_vector misses a comment.
>
>
> Ok to reuse the comment in optabs.h in optabs.c also?
Sure.
>> I wonder if at the end we wouldn't transition all backends and then
>> renaming reduc_*_scal_optab
Richard Biener wrote:
scalar_reduc_to_vector misses a comment.
Ok to reuse the comment in optabs.h in optabs.c also?
I wonder if at the end we wouldn't transition all backends and then
renaming reduc_*_scal_optab back to reduc_*_optab makes sense.
Yes, that sounds like a plan, the _scal is
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Alan Lawrence wrote:
> These match their corresponding tree codes, by taking a vector and returning
> a scalar; this is more architecturally neutral than the (somewhat loosely
> defined) previous optab that took a vector and returned a vector with the
> result in t
These match their corresponding tree codes, by taking a vector and returning a
scalar; this is more architecturally neutral than the (somewhat loosely defined)
previous optab that took a vector and returned a vector with the result in the
least significant bits (i.e. element 0 for little-endian
