[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Almost OT, < and <=

> Felix:
> > Where exactly? I can't find it... ;-)
> You'll find it deep within the churning (nay, roiling) bowels of the
> processor, being the number of different condition code flags being
> checked in the course of executing a Jxx (x86) or B + cc (ARM).  If you
> were working on a FPGA or implementing bignum comparisons, then I think
> you could more easily find it or its equivalent.

This mailing list is addressing something different, IIRC.

> David:
> > This seems kinda [...] architecture-specific.
> The way that arithmetical operations affect condition codes shows little
> variation, at least among the popular contemporary processors using
> condition codes.  x86 and ARM are rather diverse architectures, yet they
> agree on Z, N (aka S), C, V.  SPARC, too, I think.  VAX ditto.  All the
> way back to the hoary PDP-11.
> MIPS is different, not using condition codes.  The only pure-comparison
> MIPS operation is <.  (Not <=, not >.)  Anything else you'd have to
> synthesize with a subtraction.
> Beyond cycle counting, I see op< as more primitive than op<=: one
> establishes order, while the other allows for equivalence.  I would
> prefer a SORT which lets me use the most primitive predicate possible.
> On many platforms it won't matter; but on some, it may.

On which platforms might it matter, then? Can you give a code-
example (C will be fine) which shows any substantial difference in
size or speed?