Frank Heckenbach wrote:
Waldek Hebisch wrote:
My point was that we must make an API decision. Easy one is to stick to current scheme. Hard one is to try to use SSE2. SSE2 requires 128 bit alignment and means that when passing set to functions they should go in SSE register.
I infer that Frank prefers easy way
Unless someone volunteers to implement the hard one. (I won't stop them, but I won't write it myself.)
Jan Hubicka pointed out that membership testing is more expensive with SSE2, which means that hard way may in fact be slower. So I am too for easy way.