On 19.05.2017 19:22, Karoly Balogh (Charlie/SGR) wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, 19 May 2017, Sven Barth via fpc-pascal wrote: > >> I think Jeppe wanted to add vector support. Though the question here is >> whether one wants to optimize/detect this at the AST level and convert >> that to implicit vectors or at the CSE level. > > I think the higher level you can do an optimization/simplification, the > higher you should do it. Otherwise the lower layers get really messy, as > they already are in some cases. Well, in general, we should up our > floating point game. For example if Nikolay's recent load-modify-store > optimization would work on floats, that would already a nice step forward > in this case. ;) (Sorry for my ignorance, if it already works, missed that > then.)
I agree that we should improve that. Maybe we should also allow for more FPU type specific helper routines. Currently on i386 and x86_64 the x87 FPU will be used even if -CfsseX is given and only Single/Double are used, cause the compiler defaults to Extended. If SSE isn't used that might make sense, but for SSE we should fall back to Double if we're only dealing with double, IMHO (and analogous for Single). >> By the way: I think my commit today of a SSE Frac() implementation sped >> up the framerate by a third on Win64 compared to the one without it :D > > Cool, but shouldn't this be an inline node instead for real speed++...? ;) > I mean if Trunc() and Round() are... Ah, right, hadn't seen that we do indeed have an inline node implementation for x86. I should probably put that on the list then :D Regards, Sven _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
