Subject: Re: [boost] Going forward with Boost.SIMD
From: Mathias Gaunard (mathias.gaunard_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-04-19 19:37:24
On 18/04/13 14:29, Evgeny Panasyuk wrote:
> For instance, there is FMA instruction "d=a+b*c" - yes, your proposal
> have appropriate fma function in <cmath>.
> But imagine that some new architecture would have "double FMA"
> instruction like: "f=a+b*c+d*e", or even more complex instruction: "2x2
> matrix multiplication".
It is relatively easy for compilers to transform a*b+c to fma(a,b,c)
(even if the operations involved are SIMD intrinsics). As a matter of
fact, compilers already do it.