On Fri, 27 May 2016, martin krastev wrote:
A new arithmeticish type would take more effort, I understand. Marc,
are there plans to incorporate your patch, perhaps in an extended
form, in a release any time soon?
There is no plan either way. When someone is motivated enough (I am not,
currentl
A new arithmeticish type would take more effort, I understand. Marc,
are there plans to incorporate your patch, perhaps in an extended
form, in a release any time soon? My apologies if I'm addressing these
questions to the wrong person.
Regards,
Martin
On 26 May 2016 at 11:11, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Thu, 26 May 2016, martin krastev wrote:
Thank you for the reply. So it's a known g++ issue with a candidate
patch. Looking at the patch, I was wondering, what precludes the
generic vector types form being proper arithmetic types?
In some cases vectors act like arithmetic types (operator+, e
Hi Marc,
Thank you for the reply. So it's a known g++ issue with a candidate
patch. Looking at the patch, I was wondering, what precludes the
generic vector types form being proper arithmetic types?
Regards,
Martin
On 26 May 2016 at 09:02, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, 26 May 2016, martin kraste
On Thu, 26 May 2016, martin krastev wrote:
Hello,
I've been scratching my head over an implicit conversion issue,
depicted in the following code:
typedef __attribute__ ((vector_size(4 * sizeof(int int generic_int32x4;
struct Foo {
Foo() {
}
Foo(const generic_int32x4& src) {
}
