On 1/13/2012 12:27 PM, Peter Alexander wrote:
On 13/01/12 8:02 PM, Mehrdad wrote:
Er... is there any reason why we're using such a cryptic PXOR value
instead of operator overloading?
I imagine Walter will add the operator overloads later.
Right. simd() is just the bottom layer building block. It's a compiler
intrinsic, and I don't want to make every overload a compiler intrinsic.
The simd(op, ...) syntax is more flexible though because it allows you to select
instructions that don't directly map to any standard operator (e.g. shuffles).
What's our vector, Victor?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVq4_HhBK8Y
