This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Baby's First AldyVec/AltiVec patch

> Also, note that the only real syntactic extension being proposed here 
> are the
> context-sensitive keywords.  The cast expression
>     (type)(1, 2, 3, 4)
> is _already_ legal in C and C++; all the AltiVec patch does is change 
> its _semantics_

That, I think, is precisely the objection that people raised -- this
construct does not mean what some people expect it to mean.

However, I refuse to be drawn further into this debate or made out to be
the obstacle to accepting this patch. :-)

It's not my decision to make, and I don't have that strong of an

However, this question has already been debated and decided; the
decision was not to support the old syntax.  Therefore, I do not think
that the patch should not be committed until/unless there has been an
affirmative decision by a relatively broad subset of the maintainership
to overrule the previous decision.  It should take more than one
maintainer with write privileges saying "OK".

Mark Mitchell <>
CodeSourcery, LLC

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]