Displaying 2 results from an estimated 2 matches for "compilerx".
Did you mean:
compiler
2015 Jul 01
2
[LLVMdev] C as used/implemented in practice: analysis of responses
...any of above, and emit a warning
5. Bail on error
Compilers prefer not to bail on error, since the standard permits it.
A warning would be a good thing, though.
Now, since it's a warning, I *have* to output something. What? Even
considering one compiler, you'll have to convince *most* <compilerX>
engineers to agree on something, and that's not trivial.
Moreover, this loop is very easy to vectorise, and that would give me
4x speed improvements for 4-way vectorization. That's too much for
compilers to pass.
If I create a vectorised loop that goes all the way to 92, I'll have...
2015 Jul 01
2
[LLVMdev] C as used/implemented in practice: analysis of responses
On 1 July 2015 at 15:20, Russell Wallace <russell.wallace at gmail.com> wrote:
> Group all monkey's paw optimisations together, and enable them only if an
> extra compiler flag is supplied. Or failing that, at least have a compiler
> flag that will disable all of them (while leaving all the safe optimisations
> enabled).
So, are you suggesting we get rid of all undefined AND