Re: [boost] C++ announcements coming tomorrow

Subject: Re: [boost] C++ announcements coming tomorrow
From: Vicente J. Botet Escriba (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-11-04 19:16:42

Le 04/11/12 23:38, Andrey Semashev a écrit :
> On November 5, 2012 1:55:42 AM Paul Mensonides <pmenso57_at_[hidden]> 
> wrote:
>> On 11/4/2012 1:14 PM, Andrey Semashev wrote:
>>
>> I am not against all extensions.  I am against *feature* extensions.
>> There is a place for *necessary* extensions, and, in those cases, lack
>> of the presence of those extensions should easily fallback to the actual
>> language.  Hardware vectorization is one example of that.  If it exists,
>> it should exist as a compiler-specific pragma which can be ignored.
>> Further, no feature extension to the language is good if the feature
>> could be implemented via library--i.e. it should not have language
>> extensions solely for the purpose of syntactic convenience.
>
> IMHO, pragma-controlled compiler-generated vectorization is a utopy, 
> except for the very trivial things. Real benefit is provided by 
> extensions like __m128 and intrinsic functions. Also remember the 
> mentioned typeof and long long. Some things cannot be implemented on 
> the library level efficiently, and pragmas are not the silver bullet.
Compiler vendors could provide a portable implementation of these types 
and intrinsics via a library. Of course, they should use names more 
portable that should avoid conflicts using the the well know naming 
guidelines.

Just my 2cts.
Vicente