On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 04:44:04PM -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote: > >"ldv" certainly is shorter and nicer in principle, but it is a bit > >cryptic. As I said, it's probably not too hard to get used to it; and > >maybe a better name will present itself? > Maybe ldvec and stvec would serve without introducing specific builtin > confusion.
Let's go with that, if nothing better shows up. > >That's not what I meant... Can you say > > [TARGET_ALTIVEC && TARGET_64BIT] > >here? Or even just > > [!TARGET_ALTIVEC] > >or > > [1] > >for always, or > > [0] > >for never ("commented out"). > Ah! Sorry for misunderstanding. Right now just an identifier is > allowed, but we could certainly grab the whole string between the [] and > drop it in with no concerns. Hopefully we both remember when we get to > the patch that reads the stanzas... :-) Segher