Re: Re: Re: [f-cpu] GCC 3.1 for F-CPU port

["Antoine" <antoine@rezo.net>]

>>I meant e.g. 128-bit registers could be used for 2*64, 4*32,
>>8*16 or 16*8, but not for a single 128-bit integer/pointer.
>
> oh, _that_ old debate ...

Sorry, I don't mean to spawn it again if it already took place ;)
Just for information : are some manufacturers beginning
to design or think about generic-purpose 128-bit chips ?

> but then why would someone be kept from using a "whole"
> register for holding a bitmask (for video, or whatever)
> or even an IPv6 address, or things like that ?
> integers are not the only data types out there ...

The question is not really whether it's useful or not,
but whether these uses are critical enough to justify
some complication on the compiler & developer side.

As you say, bitmasks and IPv6 addresses can be stored
as SIMD or even in separate registers. The only critical
use of large integers may be for arithmetical operations,
because it is much simpler to do a 128-bit add/mul,
than several 64-bit adds/muls to emulate it.




*************************************************************
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@seul.org with
unsubscribe f-cpu       in the body. http://f-cpu.seul.org/