fpetrogalli wrote: > > @philnik777 - thank you for the patch at #68324 > > You're welcome! > > FWIW I'd find a syntax like `_ExtVector<bool, 4>` better. The underscore and > upper case to make it clear that it's non-standard and the angle bracket > syntax since it's kind-of a template. This unfortunately doesn't map really > nicely to anything native otherwise. Maybe think of it like > > ```c++ > template <class T, unsigned N> > using _ExtVector __attribute__((ext_vector_type(N))) = T; > ``` > > Then you'd actually use it as `_ExtVector<bool, 4>` in source code. I don't > think that would be significantly harder to parse.
I am almost there. Before going a bit wider with tests I wanted to let you know that, to keep the parsing operation simple, I have opted for `_ExtVector<N:T>` [1]. The reason being that the token `','` is already used to split the parameters of the prototype. Shall we rework the parser to make it compatible with template-style parameters? I like the idea a lot, I am just not sure it is worth pursuing this extra complication. Francesco [1] It will become `_ExtVector<T:N>` if I get your blessing for the split with ':' instead of ','. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83584 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
