On Mon, 2026-02-23 at 13:01 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Feb 2026, Avinash Jayakar wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 2026-02-23 at 11:21 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2026 at 10:53 AM Avinash Jayakar
> > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> > > I wonder whether match.pd matches with (cond^ ...) similar to
> > > the saturating arithmetic patterns can be used to make the
> > > matchings
> > > more maintainable?
> > >
> > Initially I tried to write simplify pattern in match.pd, that would
> > recognize a >= b ? (a > b) : -1 to a == b? 0 : (a < b) -1: 1. Which
> > enabled optimize_spaceship method. It did work when source was
> > written
> > with ternary operator.
> > But one problem was that if source is written with if-else instead
> > of
> > ternary, it did not work.
> > if (a >= b) return (a > b) else return -1;
>
> I was suggesting a
>
> (match (spaceship_lt_gt @0 @1 ...)
> (...))
>
> and to call that from the optimize_spaceship function.
Sure, I will try this.
For the test cases, is it ok to add a check_effective_target_spaceship
in target-supports.exp?
>
> Richard.
