On Wed, 2006-07-12 at 17:57, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Personally, I think we should support operator[] for vectors.
Indeed, that was one of the most popular choices when I first brought
this topic up. I contributed mips vector support in August 2004, and in
the multiple threads that patch spawned, there was some discussion of
this issue.
FYI there are a lot of problems with the current rtl vector support.
Ambiguous under defined rtl operators. Confusing, missing, undocumented
bi-endian support. Operators that can't be generated. Operators with
overlapping semantics, which makes canonical forms ambiguous. Operators
that mean different things in different md files. The whole thing is an
ugly mess. Mostly it works because we have little or no optimizer
support, which means the vector ops don't really mean much more than
unspec does. It needs someone to take a few steps back, write a
sensible design document, and then start auditing the code against the
design document.
I discussed some of the problems here
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-08/msg00327.html
--
Jim Wilson, GNU Tools Support, http://www.specifix.com
