Do we need an unsigned multiplyHigh? (original) (raw)
Andrew Haley aph at redhat.com
Tue Sep 26 08:31:42 UTC 2017
- Previous message (by thread): Do we need an unsigned multiplyHigh?
- Next message (by thread): Do we need an unsigned multiplyHigh?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 26/09/17 08:25, Peter Lawrey wrote:
I am looking forward to intrinsic support for 128 bit math using ?Long2? and XMM (or even YMM, ZMM) instructions. This is the best way forward, I hope.
Personally I would like to see a long long type, or even uint128, uint256, uint512 style notation. Another option might be something like long<128> or an annotation like @uint128 long or even @decimal128 double but who knows.
Do you actually need any of that? I think vector types make more sense. Java already has a great many scalar types.
-- Andrew Haley Java Platform Lead Engineer Red Hat UK Ltd. <https://www.redhat.com> EAC8 43EB D3EF DB98 CC77 2FAD A5CD 6035 332F A671
- Previous message (by thread): Do we need an unsigned multiplyHigh?
- Next message (by thread): Do we need an unsigned multiplyHigh?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]