News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Rejuvenating the Microsoft C/C++ Compiler. Parent comment

Re:Rejuvenating the Microsoft C/C++ Compiler by valarauca1 on Friday September 25, 2015 @07:42AM (#10277553)
>My favorite C language extension is SIMD vector arithmetic with infix operators. You can get really pretty and portable (!) vector math code written in Clang and GCC using vector extensions, but again, it's not available in MSVC.

Forgive me as I might be wrong but aren't system intrinsics the same in each compiler? I was under this impression as I wrote a lot of SSE2/3 C99 code for the GCC using MSVC++ documentation it compiles/runs without an issue. (This also before finding the MMX/SSE/AVX docs that intel has which are beautiful).

I mean the function/variable type names (for x86_64 at least) are the same for Clang/ICC/GCC/MSVC.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rejuvenating the Microsoft C/C++ Compiler by phkahler on Friday September 25, 2015 @10:00AM (#10278152)
>> Forgive me as I might be wrong but aren't system intrinsics the same in each compiler?

>> I mean the function/variable type names (for x86_64 at least) are the same for Clang/ICC/GCC/MSVC.

Yes, all those compilers support the same names for x86_64. Then a different set for ARM NEON, and a different set for PPC AltiVec. What GCC has done is implement another set of names that can be used across all those hardware architectures. To clarify the difference, you can choose - do you want to move your code between different compilers, or different hardware but always with GCC.

[ Parent | on HN ]