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]>
>> 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
Just my 2cts.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk