From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,2ac7208e3d69354f
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-06-18 13:51:13 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!opentransit.net!wanadoo.fr!not-for-mail
From: Guillaume Foliard <guifo@wanadoo.fr>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada and vectorization
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 22:51:11 +0200
Organization: _^_
Message-ID: <aeo6g0$qb8$1@wanadoo.fr>
References: <aehnbn$9ea$1@wanadoo.fr>
 <dstanbro-FA230C.22490316062002@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
 <aeir5d$8fe$06$1@news.t-online.com> <wccsn3mrgqt.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <aemqnr$grq$07$1@news.t-online.com>
 <dstanbro-16FC0C.20004918062002@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
 <aenmlj$6mq$05$1@news.t-online.com> <wccptyoxuw7.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <aeo47j$ah$06$1@news.t-online.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aboulogne-102-1-5-150.abo.wanadoo.fr
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
X-Trace: wanadoo.fr 1024433472 26984 193.252.195.150 (18 Jun 2002 20:51:12
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@wanadoo.fr
NNTP-Posting-Date: 18 Jun 2002 20:51:12 GMT
User-Agent: KNode/0.7.1
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:26303
Date: 2002-06-18T20:51:12+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Matthias Kretschmer wrote:

> As suggest in this thread using pragma for loops only isn't enough I think
> (so making it complicated I think - bloating the language up), because if
> you just think about something like:
>   a := a1*a2;
>   b := b1*b2;
>   c := c1*c2;
>   d := d1*d2
> wouldn't be cool if it is vectorized? you may say, throw anything in an
> array and then put it in a loop, but can't it happen, that these a,b,c and
> d aren't related, so putting it together into one array wouldn't be very
> wise.

Even if there not related from a semantic point of view, they are from a 
computational point of view. For the sake of performance, if performance 
matters of course, why should not we layout data in a efficient manner ? 
This does not break data abstraction, just the layout.

> Btw. are there Ada compilers available (beside gcc 3.1 - yes the backend
> is capable of using the vector units of at least x86-based cpus as stated
> on gcc.gnu.org) which currently use vectorization and/or inter-procedure
> optimization?

Just a precision here, GCC 3.1 does not vectorize, it just uses the vector 
unit in a scalar manner as a faster x87 FPU.
Have you got any links talking about "inter-procedure optimization" ?