"It's basically a portable assembler," he said, "why don't you take a bite of the apple?"
-
-
But it kind of used to be, and now it isn't. Would be nice to have something designed for that purpose.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
If you read the standards (even old versions) & rationale it's clear this was just due to bad impls.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RichFelker
I've referred to different versions of ISO C & C++ for several years, and I do not immediately recall any \
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JamesWidman @RichFelker
particular passage that makes this clear.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JamesWidman @RichFelker
But regardless of the intentions of "The Founding Fathers," a very popular behavior was established, and then it was broken.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JamesWidman @RichFelker
And it didn't need to be broken. E.g. if Clang had -fno-strict-aliasing set by default, it would still be a conforming impl.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JamesWidman
A conforming implementation that never performs vectorization unless perhaps you use the restrict keyword.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RichFelker
This is understood, and this was the old behavior, and this was preferable to having shit break unexpectedly.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JamesWidman
The old behavior was having people write thousands of lines of SSE asm or intrinsics by hand, all non-portable & full of bugs..
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
The main purpose of an opt. compiler is not to make code faster but to keep people from writing shitty hacks "for performance".
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.