Gah. Not a good combination do heavy editing and insufficient proofreading make.
* A. Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-01-22 03:55]: > Good point; however, this means a > different way to think of the vector ops than we had so far. > Basically, we're moving from the realm of vector ops to that of > vectorized operands. > > In light of this, I think Austin's proposal of marking the > operands as vectorized makes a lot of sense. It was an > unexpected twist > that had me taken aback for a moment, but I like it more the > more I think about it. It *feels* right to emphasize > vectorization as something that happens to an operand, rather > than something that's a property of the operation. -- Regards, Aristotle "If you can't laugh at yourself, you don't take life seriously enough."
