As always: modularization! :) And see the comments in the GitHub file below. https://github.com/laforest/Octavo/blob/master/Parts/Misc/Annuller.v … http://fpgacpu.ca/fpga/annuller.html …
-
Can you provide an example of where a mere stylistic difference makes a significant difference in what the C compiler generates?
I'm not sure I'd call replacing the ?: code with & ~{W{..}} a pure stylistic difference. But okay, if that counts: https://godbolt.org/z/5IK-SY (This is with gcc. Clang has an opt for this. But that's my point: It's all based on pattern matching, not logic equivalence classes.)
-
-
Of course with all such examples one can always argue what is "significant" and what is "pure stylistic". Here is another one where the compiler has one pattern built-in but not others: https://godbolt.org/z/isRVRD
-
Thanks the example! In corner A we have the single most basic feature in the device, the flip-flop, in corner B we something that is pretty exotic (hardly a guaranteed feature in a processor and far from the basic semantics of C). Not quite comparable IMhO
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
That a totally legit example, nice find. I have to say that the equivalence doesn't exactly jump out at you, but yes, the compiler should have treated them the same.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.