Hi,
I have looked throu the patches, and my preference would be to split the
work on simd,
into the chunks that get reviewed and landated into the trunk branch. So
multiple patch series.
This will require some effort on your part into reshuffling the comments,
so I would like to hear
your opinion on that first.
With the mdspan, we have worked by having an internal feature test macro
exposed with value
one (so no_stdname in version.def), until we have complete implementation.
What i would suggest would be to have:
1) simd::vec, simd::mask and basic math ops for integral/floating point
types,
a difference here from existing patches would be that we will not
include
parts related to complex (bit_mask handling, _M_complex functions from
basic_simd_vec)
2) bit operations for simd
3) math operations for simd
4) simd from complex
I have also realized that the patches do not include any test for simd,
this make is very hard
to review, as I do not have any example to check, work on. So having some
minimal test suite
in repo would be valuable from a review point.
Again, this will make the submission less convenient on your end, so please
let me know if that
is workable. If not I will try to continue on the forge in the form we have
currently.
On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 at 5:40 PM Matthias Kretz <[email protected]> wrote:
> Tomasz Kaminski [Friday, 10 October 2025, 17:18:15 CEST]:
> > No need to do it when the patch is available on forge. We can iterate
> there.
>
> Do you prefer if I add commits and rebase/squash/fixup only when we're
> done,
> or do you prefer if I force-push changes?
>
> Also, should I simply keeping the mailing lists up to date by writing a
> mail
> to this thread whenever the forge's PR needs re-review?
>
> --
> ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
> Dr. Matthias Kretz https://mattkretz.github.io
> GSI Helmholtz Center for Heavy Ion Research https://gsi.de
> std::simd
> ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
>
