search for: d6d7a9aa

...uot; or "unsigned" type. That tends to work out nicely for register-oriented targets. Is there a reason why llvm does not take that approach? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20100914/d6d7a9aa/attachment.html>

On Aug 18, 2010, at 10:27 AM, Bob Wilson wrote: >> I tend to think that it isn't worth the compile time to try to microoptimize out every compare, but I could be convinced otherwise if there are important use cases we're failing to handle. I also do think that whole-function selection dags will solve a lot of grossness (e.g. much of codegen prepare) with a very clean model. >

On Aug 18, 2010, at 9:56 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Aug 18, 2010, at 9:22 AM, Bob Wilson wrote: >> I'm looking at llvm-generated ARM code that has some unnecessary UXTB (zero extend) instructions, and it seems to me that doing type legalization as an entirely local transformation is not the best approach. > > That's true, but doing isel as a purely local approach

...type. That tends to > work out nicely for register-oriented targets. Is there a reason why llvm > does not take that approach? > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/attachments/20100914/d6d7a9aa/attachment-0001.html > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:50:35 -0700 > From: Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] ARM MC .s status? > To: Jason Kim <jasonwkim at google.com> > Cc: LLVM Develope...