From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Mike Stump <mrs@windriver.com>
To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, kumar@chaos.ph.utexas.edu
Subject: Re: AltiVec support in GCC
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2000 17:13:00 -0000
Message-id: <200002190112.RAA17849@kankakee.wrs.com>
X-SW-Source: 2000-02/msg00550.html

> Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2000 22:30:00 -0600 (CST)
> From: Kumar Gala <kumar@chaos.ph.utexas.edu>
> To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org

> The major issues that I have been told about, surrounds the fact that the
> Motorola changes add a 'vector' primitive.  

Sounds half way reasonable.  I have here in my hand a piece of paper,
no, a compiler for the Pentium III SSE with intrinsic support for SSE.
It adds a vector type to the compiler also.

Would be nice if a person in the know took the moto patches and the
SSE patches and unified them...  If not, then the first set in, wins,
and the other will just have to cope, extend and transform.

> the C API is much more like 'c' function calls

Same with the SSE stuff.

> Also, people have discussed the creation of auto-vectorizing
> compilers.  While this can be useful for the simple case, from the
> AltiVec code I think it would be very diffucult to get full use of
> the AltiVec instruction set.

Yes, this is a longer range goal that shouldn't be worried about at
first.  I think we can postpone talks about it.