mirror of https://github.com/CGAL/cgal
Reorder some macro tests, no functional change.
This commit is contained in:
parent
37cab384f8
commit
dd4f968c48
|
|
@ -153,7 +153,12 @@ inline double IA_opacify(double x)
|
|||
asm volatile ("" : "+m"(x) );
|
||||
# endif
|
||||
return x;
|
||||
#elif defined __GNUG__ || defined __xlC__
|
||||
#elif defined __xlC__
|
||||
// PowerPC - XL C++ (the z/OS version supposedly does not define this macro)
|
||||
// If we give it an alternative "+fm", it gets confused and generates worse code.
|
||||
asm volatile ("" : "+f"(x) );
|
||||
return x;
|
||||
#elif defined __GNUG__
|
||||
// Intel used not to emulate this perfectly, we'll see.
|
||||
// If we create a version of IA_opacify for vectors, note that gcc < 4.8
|
||||
// fails with "+g" and we need to use "+mx" instead.
|
||||
|
|
@ -179,10 +184,6 @@ inline double IA_opacify(double x)
|
|||
# elif (defined __VFP_FP__ && !defined __SOFTFP__) || defined __aarch64__
|
||||
// ARM
|
||||
asm volatile ("" : "+gw"(x) );
|
||||
# elif defined __xlC__
|
||||
// PowerPC - XL C++ (the z/OS version supposedly does not define this macro)
|
||||
// If we give it an alternative "+fm", it gets confused and generates worse code.
|
||||
asm volatile ("" : "+f"(x) );
|
||||
# elif defined __powerpc__ || defined __POWERPC__
|
||||
// PowerPC
|
||||
asm volatile ("" : "+gd"(x) );
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue