The term of art for this technique is "idiom recognition" and it's proper ancient, like, APL compilers did have some idiom recognition 50+ years ago.

An example you'll see in say a modern C compiler is that if you write the obvious loop to calculate how many bits are set in an int, the actual machine code on a brand new CPU should be a single population count instruction, C provides neither intrinsics (like Rust) not a dedicated "popcount" feature, so you can't write that but it's obviously what you want here and yup an optimising C compiler will do that.

However, LLVM is dealing with an IR generated by other compiler folk so I think it probably has less use for idiom recognition. Clang would do the recognition and lower to the same LLVM IR as Rust does for its intrinsic population count core::intrinsics::ctpop so the LLVM backend doesn't need to spot this. I might be wrong, but I think that's how it works.

> An example you'll see in say a modern C compiler is that if you write the obvious loop to calculate how many bits are set in an int, the actual machine code on a brand new CPU should be a single population count instruction, C provides neither intrinsics (like Rust) not a dedicated "popcount" feature, so you can't write that but it's obviously what you want here and yup an optimising C compiler will do that.

C compilers definitely have intrinsics for this, for GCC for instance it is `__builtin_popcount`.

And apparently it has even standard language support for it since C23, it's `stdc_count_ones` [1] and in C++ you have `std::popcount` [2]

[1] https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/numeric/bit_manip.html [2] https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/numeric/popcount.html