lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Jun]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: using gcc built-ins for bitops?
On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 02:00:22AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > and/or architectures.... is this worth doing?
>
> I guess it depends on the resulting code size and quality. Some extra
> conversions would be needed for that.

ok I'll see if I can get some detailed info on that

>
> For the implementation it would be nice to have the old-style
> implementations in one header and the new-style ones in a separate header.
> That would create a bit of an all-or-nothing situation, but that should be
> OK?

Perhaps. It's not impossible that say gcc 3.5 will add a few more builtins
even that then allow more functions to be converted, otoh that shouldn't be
impossible to cope with. I'll have a look to see how it pans out.

Greetings,
Arjan van de Ven
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:04    [W:1.497 / U:0.044 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site