a Wrote: > > Would this tie SIMD support directly to x86/x86_64, or would it > > possible to also support NEON on ARM (also 128 bit SIMD, see > > http://infocenter.arm.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.arm.doc.ddi0409g/index.html > > ) ? > > (Obviously not for DMD, but if the syntax wasn't directly tied to > > x86/64, GDC and LDC could support this) > > It seems like using a standard naming convention instead of directly > > referencing instructions could let the underlying SIMD instructions > > vary across platforms, but I don't know enough about the technologies > > to say whether NEON's capabilities match SSE closely enough that they > > could be handled the same way. > > For NEON you would need at least a function with a signature: > > __v128 simdop(operator, __v128 op1, __v128 op2, __v128 op3); > > since many NEON instructions operate on three registers.
Disregard that, I wasn't paying atention to the return type. What Walter proposed can already handle three operand NEON instructions.
