search for: panoply

Since you're already set up for benchmarks, I would ask if you could benchmark the difference between using and not using the ARM64 inline assembly. I believe the original justification on ARMv7 for the assembly was the processor's panoply of multiply instructions and their long cycle times. It seems to me that the ARM64 processor is much more like an x86 one, where using a simpleminded C multiply gives just as good of results. Inline assembly tends to hobble the compiler's optimizer, and in ARM64's case, may actually be...

...com> wrote: >> >> Since you're already set up for benchmarks, I would ask if you could >> benchmark the difference between using and not using the ARM64 inline >> assembly. I believe the original justification on ARMv7 for the assembly >> was the processor's panoply of multiply instructions and their long >> cycle times. It seems to me that the ARM64 processor is much more like >> an x86 one, where using a simpleminded C multiply gives just as good of >> results. Inline assembly tends to hobble the compiler's optimizer, and >> in AR...

...idges at masque.com> wrote: > > Since you're already set up for benchmarks, I would ask if you could > benchmark the difference between using and not using the ARM64 inline > assembly. I believe the original justification on ARMv7 for the assembly > was the processor's panoply of multiply instructions and their long > cycle times. It seems to me that the ARM64 processor is much more like > an x86 one, where using a simpleminded C multiply gives just as good of > results. Inline assembly tends to hobble the compiler's optimizer, and > in ARM64's ca...

Hello everyone, I have been trying to figure out away to integrate under a spline produced by the package tps(fields). As the package does not output functions I am trying to do something similar to the trapezium rule. My data are 3D (x, y & z). I have extracted from the surface output by Tps the values of z at regular intervals so that I have a grid of figures, for example: 1 4 6 6 8 8