Even stricter implicit conversions between vectors

[Ian Ollmann]

On Nov 2, 2006, at 5:33 AM, Mark Shinwell wrote:

> Ian Ollmann wrote:
>> stronger type checking seems like a good idea to me in general.
>
> I agree, but I don't really want to break lots of code all at once,
> even if that code is being slightly more slack than it perhaps ought
> to be :-)
>
> Given that no-one has really objected to stronger type-checking here
> _per se_, then I see two ways forward:
>
> 1. Treat this as a regression: fix it and cause errors upon bad
> conversions, but risk breaking code.
>
> 2. Emit a warning in cases of converting "vector signed int" to
> "vector unsigned int", etc., and state that the behaviour will change
> to an error in a later version.

I filed a bug (to the Apple bug queue) when I first noticed the  
relaxation of type checking which essentially asked for #1.
That was of course some time ago. A lot of code has happened between  
then and now.

If you take option #2, that will leave the world with a bunch of code  
that will only compile on GCC ...not that there are that many other  
AltiVec enabled compilers left...  In any case, It seems to me like  
it is a good idea to fix the code while someone still remembers what  
it does.

Ian