Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [OT?] SIMD and Auto-Vectorization (was Re: How to structurate libraries ?)
From: Michael Marcin (mike.marcin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-01-21 21:07:58

David A. Greene wrote:
> On Wednesday 21 January 2009 03:11, David Abrahams wrote:
>> on Tue Jan 20 2009, "David A. Greene" <> wrote:
>>> When you're talking "optimal," you're setting a pretty dang high bar.
>> I don't have to care about "optimal" if the difference between a
>> suboptimal use of SIMD and not using it at all is an order of magnitude.
> Well, the whole discussion is about "optimal." If one doesn't care about
> "optimal" then a compiler will do just fine all the time and there's no need
> for a DSEL, asm or ugly gcc intrinsics.

What if we replace optimal with optimized?

Surely library code than gives a 4x speedup is desirable to have even if
you can hand generate code that gives you a 5x. Getting a 4x speedup
over naive simd-less in simple vector operations and still being able to
concentrate on the problem at hand instead of low level optimization
details sounds fantastic to me.

Michael Marcin

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at