6 ms·
I think I do understand, this is exactly what we do. (MEGA_MACRO == HWY_NAMESPACE) Then we have a table of function pointers to &AVX2::foo, &AVX3::foo etc. As
by janwas 2y ago
I think I do understand, this is exactly what we do. (MEGA_MACRO == HWY_NAMESPACE)
Then we have a table of function pointers to &AVX2::foo, &AVX3::foo etc. As long as the module exports one single thing, which either calls into or exports this table, I do not see how it is incompatible with building your project using modules enabled?
(The way we compile the code twice is to re-include our source file, taking care that only the SIMD parts are actually seen by the compiler, and stuff like the module exports would only be compiled once.)
- dyaroshev 2y ago> is to re-include our source file Yeah - that means your source file is never a module. We would really like eve to be modularized, the CI times are unbearable. I'd love to be proven wrong here, that'd be amazing. But I don't think google highway can be modularized.
- janwas 2y agoWhat leads you to that conclusion? It is still possible to use #include in module implementations. We can use that to make the module implementation look like your example. Thus it ought to be possible, though I have not yet tried it.
- dyaroshev 2y agoWell. You have a file, something like: load.h You need to include it multiple times, compiled with different flags. So - it's never going to be in load.cxx or whatever that's called.
- janwas 2y agoAs mentioned ("re-include our source file"), we are indeed able to put the SIMD code, as well as the self-#include of itself, in a load.cxx TU. Here is an example: https://github.com/google/gemma.cpp/blob/9dfe2a76be63bcfe679b94335f171674420f92e8/ops/bench_matmul.cc#L49 https://github.com/google/gemma.cpp/blob/9dfe2a76be63bcfe679...
- dyaroshev 2y agoI don't think this works if your files are modules. Let's stop here, it doesn't seem like we understand each other.