Issue #16487 has been updated by shyouhei (Shyouhei Urabe).


I would like to support this.  The linked pull request shows 20x speed up f=
or `coderange_scan`, which is definitely worth the hustle.

Of course decreased portability & maintainability are problems.  We have to=
 somehow handle them.  Let's discuss that.  But every optimization must com=
e with increased complexity and vectorization is just another example of it=
.  If an optimization is effective enough compared to its cost (and I think=
 that is the case here), I believe we should do that.

----------------------------------------
Misc #16487: Potential for SIMD usage in ruby-core
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/16487#change-83716

* Author: byroot (Jean Boussier)
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: =

----------------------------------------
### Context

There are several ruby core methods that could be optimized with the use of=
 SIMD instructions.

I experimented a bit on `coderange_scan` https://github.com/Shopify/ruby/pu=
ll/2, and Pavel Rosick=FD experimented on `String#strip` https://github.com=
/ruby/ruby/pull/2815.

### Problem

The downside of SIMD instructions is that they are not universally availabl=
e.
So it means maintaining several versions of the same code, and switching th=
em either statically or dynamically.

And since most Ruby users use precompiled binaries from repositories and su=
ch, it would need to be dynamic if we want most users to benefit from it.

So it's not exactly "free speed", as it means a complexified codebase.

### Question

So the question is to know wether ruby-core is open to patches using SIMD i=
nstructions ? And if so under which conditions.

cc @shyouhei





-- =

https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request / ruby-lang.org?subject=3Dunsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>