‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Monday, December 9, 2019 3:39 AM, Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You don't want to do it this way but map _Complex double to a vector > of 2 * n doubles instead. > Look into get_related_vectype_for_scalar_type where it alreday has > code to "change" the > scalar type into something that fits what we allow for vectors. > > Richard. I'm a little farther along. I'm comparing a compilation that calls sine in a loop, and is successfully vectorized, to a compilation calling sincos in a loop and for which vectorization fails. The earliest difference between the two now is that vectorizing sine returns true in the call to vectorizable_simd_clone_call but is false for vectorizing sincos. My understanding is that sine is known to be vectorizable because there is a vector sine prototype in GLIBC's math-vector.h. In which director(y|ies) do declaration and definition of a vector version of built-in cexpi go? Bert.
