search for: pr2957

...ef) for the shuffle mask, not "operands". This > eliminates the nastiness we have now were we need a buildvector, and > it eliminates the dance we have to prevent the build vector from being > legalized, and prevent the integer operands to it from being legalized. This is PR2957 (which originally suggested a variadic SDNode, but it quickly became clear that an array of ints is better). It would be great to have a volunteer for this (I don't have time). Ciao, Duncan.

...uot;operands". This > > eliminates the nastiness we have now were we need a buildvector, and > > it eliminates the dance we have to prevent the build vector from > being > > legalized, and prevent the integer operands to it from being > legalized. > > This is PR2957 (which originally suggested a variadic SDNode, but it > quickly became clear that an array of ints is better). It would be > great to have a volunteer for this (I don't have time). > > Ciao, > > Duncan. > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Devel...

...eliminates the nastiness we have now were we need a buildvector, >> and >> > it eliminates the dance we have to prevent the build vector from >> being >> > legalized, and prevent the integer operands to it from being >> legalized. >> >> This is PR2957 (which originally suggested a variadic SDNode, but it >> quickly became clear that an array of ints is better). It would be >> great to have a volunteer for this (I don't have time). >> >> Ciao, >> >> Duncan. >> >> _______________________________...

...e mask, not "operands". This > > eliminates the nastiness we have now were we need a buildvector, and > > it eliminates the dance we have to prevent the build vector from being > > legalized, and prevent the integer operands to it from being legalized. > > This is PR2957 (which originally suggested a variadic SDNode, but it > quickly became clear that an array of ints is better). It would be > great to have a volunteer for this (I don't have time). > > Ciao, > > Duncan. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrub...

...>>> > eliminates the nastiness we have now were we need a buildvector, and >>> > it eliminates the dance we have to prevent the build vector from being >>> > legalized, and prevent the integer operands to it from being legalized. >>> >>> This is PR2957 (which originally suggested a variadic SDNode, but it >>> quickly became clear that an array of ints is better). It would be >>> great to have a volunteer for this (I don't have time). >>> >>> Ciao, >>> >>> Duncan. >>> >> &gt...

...erands". This >> > eliminates the nastiness we have now were we need a buildvector, and >> > it eliminates the dance we have to prevent the build vector from being >> > legalized, and prevent the integer operands to it from being legalized. >> >> This is PR2957 (which originally suggested a variadic SDNode, but it >> quickly became clear that an array of ints is better). It would be >> great to have a volunteer for this (I don't have time). >> >> Ciao, >> >> Duncan. >> > > ______________________________...

...have now were we need a buildvector, >>> and >>> > it eliminates the dance we have to prevent the build vector from >>> being >>> > legalized, and prevent the integer operands to it from being >>> legalized. >>> >>> This is PR2957 (which originally suggested a variadic SDNode, but it >>> quickly became clear that an array of ints is better). It would be >>> great to have a volunteer for this (I don't have time). >>> >>> Ciao, >>> >>> Duncan. >>> >>>...

On Feb 23, 2009, at 1:20 PM, Scott Michel wrote: > Chris: > > I did float this by the dev list first a couple of weeks ago, didn't > receive any comments. Ok, I didn't see it, sorry about that. > It's not entirely gratuitous; the rationale for adding a new node > class is threefold: > > a) Convenience for the backends. Since it benefits multiple backends

Chris: I did float this by the dev list first a couple of weeks ago, didn't receive any comments. It's not entirely gratuitous; the rationale for adding a new node class is threefold: a) Convenience for the backends. Since it benefits multiple backends (PPC and CellSPU), it's a logical addition. I reckon the GPU efforts would also benefit. b) Where else would one encapsulate a