From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
To: Joe Buck <Joe.Buck@synopsys.COM>
Cc: James Morrison <ja2morri@csclub.uwaterloo.ca>,
Roger Sayle <roger@eyesopen.com>,
Scott Robert Ladd <coyote@coyotegulch.com>,
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: GCC viciously beaten by ICC in trig test!
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 13:31:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040316112148.GU3822@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040315101313.A4286@synopsys.com>
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 10:13:13AM -0800, Joe Buck wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 07:11:04AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > Well, the inlines shouldn't be removed, but guarded with
> > # if !__GNUC_PREREQ (MAJOR,MINOR)
> > ...
> > # endif
> > where MAJOR, MINOR is the first __GNUC__ and __GNUC_MINOR__ of GCC which
> > can handle all cases the same or better than the glibc inline.
>
> Is the proper requirement "all cases"? What if the glibc inline is
> sometimes better, but sometimes far worse?
Ok, all cases is not necessary, but good judgement needs to be applied.
I've tried to look at a few inlines today, e.g. signbit in GCC is as good
as glibc builtin, which means __builtin_signbit should be used,
but already on IA-32 __builtin_signbitl is worse.
Although GCC 3.5 has really many math builtins, most of them do nothing
and thus are usually worse than what GLIBC provides (tried e.g. exp, tan).
Jakub
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-03-16 13:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 74+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-03-14 23:40 Scott Robert Ladd
2004-03-14 23:49 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2004-03-15 1:47 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-03-15 0:11 ` Paolo Carlini
2004-03-15 1:47 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-03-15 2:07 ` Daniel Berlin
2004-03-15 2:30 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-03-15 2:31 ` Daniel Berlin
2004-03-15 2:38 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-03-15 10:00 ` Sebastian Pop
2004-03-15 0:12 ` GCC beaten by ICC in stupid " Andrew Pinski
2004-03-15 0:32 ` Paolo Carlini
2004-03-15 1:31 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-03-15 2:36 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-03-15 11:25 ` Paolo Carlini
2004-03-15 11:31 ` Paolo Carlini
2004-03-15 13:29 ` Zdenek Dvorak
2004-03-15 13:42 ` Paolo Carlini
2004-03-15 13:51 ` Zdenek Dvorak
2004-03-15 13:55 ` Paolo Carlini
2004-03-15 14:00 ` Zdenek Dvorak
2004-03-15 14:05 ` Joseph S. Myers
2004-03-15 14:13 ` Paolo Carlini
2004-03-15 14:18 ` Zdenek Dvorak
2004-03-15 14:29 ` Segher Boessenkool
2004-03-15 14:28 ` Joseph S. Myers
2004-03-15 1:55 ` GCC viciously beaten by ICC in " Roger Sayle
2004-03-15 2:22 ` Dan Nicolaescu
2004-03-15 12:05 ` Stelios Xanthakis
2004-03-15 18:22 ` Dan Nicolaescu
2004-03-15 2:41 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-03-15 3:05 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2004-03-15 14:47 ` Segher Boessenkool
2004-03-15 17:44 ` Geert Bosch
2004-03-15 17:46 ` Geert Bosch
2004-03-15 2:41 ` Kaveh R. Ghazi
2004-03-15 6:06 ` Andreas Jaeger
2004-03-15 8:57 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2004-03-15 3:01 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2004-03-15 4:06 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-03-15 5:15 ` James Morrison
2004-03-15 8:20 ` Jakub Jelinek
2004-03-15 18:13 ` Joe Buck
2004-03-16 13:31 ` Jakub Jelinek [this message]
2004-03-15 7:42 ` Ranjit Mathew
2004-03-15 19:00 ` Toon Moene
2004-03-15 19:44 ` Laurent GUERBY
2004-03-15 3:19 Stephan T. Lavavej
2004-03-15 3:29 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2004-03-15 12:40 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-03-15 12:53 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2004-03-15 13:37 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-03-15 15:11 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2004-03-15 16:25 ` Stephan T. Lavavej
2004-03-15 16:40 ` Jakub Jelinek
2004-03-15 16:46 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2004-03-15 16:56 ` Paolo Carlini
2004-03-15 17:10 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2004-03-15 17:15 ` Paolo Carlini
2004-03-15 17:58 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2004-03-15 16:59 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2004-03-15 17:28 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2004-03-15 17:47 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2004-03-15 17:52 ` Joe Buck
2004-03-15 17:53 ` Phil Edwards
2004-03-15 17:45 ` Joe Buck
2004-03-15 19:50 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-03-16 1:00 ` Zack Weinberg
2004-03-17 0:07 ` Kai Henningsen
2004-03-16 23:12 ` Kai Henningsen
2004-03-17 3:00 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2004-03-15 17:42 ` Joe Buck
2004-03-17 0:31 Stephan T. Lavavej
2004-03-17 3:30 ` Ian Lance Taylor
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040316112148.GU3822@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz \
--to=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=Joe.Buck@synopsys.COM \
--cc=coyote@coyotegulch.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=ja2morri@csclub.uwaterloo.ca \
--cc=roger@eyesopen.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).