Article View: comp.lang.misc
Article #1974Re: Answers, Chapter 2: to point or not to point
From: Jim Giles
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 1990 21:56
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 1990 21:56
22 lines
1453 bytes
1453 bytes
From article <6243:Nov720:29:4090@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>, by brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein): > In article <5088@lanl.gov> jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) writes: > [...] >> Modula 2 C >> for i := 1 to N do p = &x[1][0]; q = p+N; >> x[1,i] := x[2,i] for (i=0; i<N; i++) >> end; *p++ = *q++; > [...] > I believe that if you stated it correctly, the Convex compiler would be > able to optimize it (specifically, vectorize it) the way you want. I never claimed that a smart compiler _couldn't_ optimize the above. I gave it originally as an example of something which the compiler would have to do _extra_ work to recover information if the array code were preprocessed into pointers (which you _did_ suggest should be done). I specifically said that a smart compiler _could_ find the information again. With your stand against optimizers though, why do you claim that it's acceptable to put the compiler through all that extra work? J. Giles
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<5220@lanl.gov>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!rutgers!cmcl2!lanl!jlgReferences:
<6243:Nov720:29:4090@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!rutgers!cmcl2!lanl!jlg From: jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: Answers, Chapter 2: to point or not to point Message-ID: <5220@lanl.gov> Date: 7 Nov 90 21:56:15 GMT References: <6243:Nov720:29:4090@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> Organization: Los Alamos Natl Lab, Los Alamos, N.M. Lines: 22