Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "i2048".
Did you mean:
2048
2008 Sep 08
0
[LLVMdev] Integer questions
...ely not do it)?
Has anyone thought about putting bignum's inside LLVM itself, LLVM
would be able to generate the best things possible for a given system,
and I do not mean bignum like some arbitrary sized number ala
Python/Erlang/etc. number, some static sized integer would be best for
my use, i2048 for example, although if there were an arbitrary length
version I would put that in the language as well.
Which I guess I should also ask about, how does LLVM do error handling
for when something cannot be compiled for whatever reason?
2008 Sep 08
2
[LLVMdev] Integer questions
On Sep 5, 2008, at 3:07 PM, Duncan Sands wrote:
> The current maximum the code generators support is i256. If you try
> to
> use bigger integers it will work fine in the bitcode, but if you try
> to do code generation the compiler will crash.
FYI, there is one other issue here, PR2660. While codegen in
general can handle types like i256, individual targets don't always
have
2015 Nov 10
2
Generating Big Num addition code which uses ADC (add with carry) instructions
I'm trying to work out LLVM code which generates something similar to the
following when adding large multiword numbers stored as separate words:
ADD x1 x1
ADC x2 y2
ADC x3 y3
etc, where such a three argument add like ADC on x86 (which includes a
carry in the addition) is available as a machine op.
The background to this is that I'm trying to implement fast multiword
addition in
2008 Sep 08
2
[LLVMdev] Integer questions
...anyone thought about putting bignum's inside LLVM itself, LLVM
> would be able to generate the best things possible for a given system,
> and I do not mean bignum like some arbitrary sized number ala
> Python/Erlang/etc. number, some static sized integer would be best for
> my use, i2048 for example, although if there were an arbitrary length
> version I would put that in the language as well.
Integers like i2048 that are well beyond the reach of the register
set on x86 pose additional challenges if you want efficient generated
code.
>
>
> Which I guess I should also...
2015 Feb 02
3
[LLVMdev] LLVM IR i128
For 64-bit X86 code we have had good success with using up-to 128-bit
integers (this includes say 36-bit or even 2-bit integers).
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 4:03 PM, Alejandro Velasco
<gollumdelperdiguero at gmail.com> wrote:
> I asked a similar question last year here. Operations on types iN with no
> direct translation into one assembly instruction seem to be translated into
>