Re: Matrix Multiplication

["Howard W. LUDWIG" <howard.w.ludwig@lmco.com>]

Well, I've worked on a processor which has a rather complex instruction set,
although it did not include matrix multiplication as an instruction.  My 
favorite instruction was the one that allowed me to do FFTs on a power-of-2,
up to 64, number of complex data items.  The Ada compiler vendor had lots of
fun with this machine--they created a package of Machine-Specific Procedures
which we could call and would be compiled/translated into the corresponding
assembly instruction inline.  About 90 % of the code looked like assembly 
language with Ada syntax (semicolon at the end of the statement, parentheses
around the set of operands, ...).

Now you might ask why we did such a thing--why not just write in assembly 
language in the first place?  Let's just say--overzealous bureaucrats 
enforcing the "single language policy" (also commonly known as "the Ada 
Mandate").

Howard W. LUDWIG

"Carlisle, Martin" wrote:
> 
> Suppose you have such a machine (wow! talk about complex instruction sets!).
> I then grant that any good Fortran compiler would use it.  However, it also
> follows that any Ada compiler could create a small function to use it (e.g.
> using Machine code insertions), and then pragma Inline that function.
> 
> --Martin