search for: unextended

..., with very little poking around the internals. I'm usually asking, not answering, questions here: the 24 bit floats reminded me of the "good old days" at ATI. That said, I think you could make f32/i32 work for your purposes - given the limited types and memory operations of unextended GLSL. At a minimum, I think that starting with f32/i32 would give you chance to learn and understand more about LLVM. If there are people who are willing to help you add i24/f24 to LLVM's core code base or you have time to learn about LLVM's internals on your own, then adding 24 bi...

Thanks again for your help Steve, I’m thinking perhaps my “SelectADDRrr” pattern is inadequate. The sign-extension is at the hardware level, the code generator sees (should see) it as a 16-bit signed register value. My implementation is just: bool SHAVEISelDAGtoDAG::SelectADDRrr(SDValue &Addr, SDValue &Base, SDValue &Offset) { if ((Addr.getOpcode() == ISD::ADD) { Base

...oose syntax for new constructs. I would think that the general goals are: 1. Standard Markdown formatters (without extensions) should render all but the portions of the document using the extension correctly; i.e. the extension syntax shouldn't break the rest of the Markdown syntax. 2. Unextended Markdown documents should not "accidentally" use extended syntax; i.e. a valid standard markdown document should render exactly the same way when run through an extended formatter. 3. Standard Markdown formatters should be able to identify the extended constructs used in a document....

...d attribute ends up on these children without it ever being placed there. Maybe because after the repeating of the HTML, elements temporarily have the same id. I found that if _extended is a function and not just a ''true'' flag then ie won''t mysteriously place it on unextended elements. For legacy reasons, I map $() to el() in my library. I''ve wrapped $ () with a fix that could easily be placed within $() itself. // Same as $, but fixes ie bugs, var el_extended = function() { return true; } var el = function() { var results = [], element; for (var i =...

...> int %e, add int %c, 1 <--- depends on the result of the first addition > > However, this means the backend has to remember the register %a now > stores low bytes of the result, and the register %c stores the high > bytes of the result. This tracking is not an easy job, I think. Unextended GLSL doesn't require support for integers larger than 16 bits. > >> I assume you'll be starting with the reference GLSL parser (from >> 3DLabs, IIRC - I don't even know if they stil exist, actually) > > You can find the 3Dlabs frontend here: > http://l4.me.uk/...

> I disagree. This should be handled by the type legalization > infrastructure. huh... As far as I know, the type legalization is in the SelectionDAG phase, and it is also in the backend. Am I right? or I miss something. > there is currently no support for anything like f32 -> f24 You say "there is currently no support for anything like f32 -> f24", does it means I can

The following line causes trouble both with IE 6&7: cels[i].toggle(); It tells me that this element does not support the property or method. The element is a cell (TD) which I checked by outputting the tagName and it works with FF, Opera and Safari. The IE script debugger stops at this line but I didn''t find a single posting on the net with a similar problem which is kind of strange.

...gine we don't have load/store instructions, > > we don't have memory, we just have registers. > > > I will run OpenGL shading laugnage programs on these chip. > > GLSL doesn't have pointers, so no "generic" load + store simplifying   > things. > > Unextended GLSL only requires support for integers in the 16 bit   > range, and has no bitwise operations. It also doesn't specify integer   > overflow behavior in any way. > > The machines I worked with didn't support any integer ops, but GLSL   > let us get by with "emulated&quot...

On Wednesday 26 November 2008 09:31:26 Wei wrote: > O...k... I try to make some conclusions: > > 1) The conversion from f32 to f24 or i32 to i24 should be written in > the backend. I disagree. This should be handled by the type legalization infrastructure. After all, that's what it is for! However there is currently no support for anything like f32 -> f24. On the other

...> That is to say, you can imagine we don't have load/store instructions, > we don't have memory, we just have registers. > > I will run OpenGL shading laugnage programs on these chip. GLSL doesn't have pointers, so no "generic" load + store simplifying things. Unextended GLSL only requires support for integers in the 16 bit range, and has no bitwise operations. It also doesn't specify integer overflow behavior in any way. The machines I worked with didn't support any integer ops, but GLSL let us get by with "emulated" 16 bit integers (stori...

I have 24-bit integer operations as well as 24-bit floating point (s7.16) operations. The H/W supports load/store instructions, however, they does suggest us not to use these load/store instructions besides debugging purpose. That is to say, you can imagine we don't have load/store instructions, we don't have memory, we just have registers. I will run OpenGL shading laugnage programs on