Any usable SIMD implementation?

[9il via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 5 April 2016 at 10:27:46 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 4/5/2016 2:03 AM, John Colvin wrote:
> There's a line between trying to standardize everything and 
> letting add-on libraries be free to innovate.
>
> Besides, I think it's a poor design to customize the app for 
> only one SIMD type. A better idea (I've repeated this ad 
> nauseum over the years) is to have n modules, one for each 
> supported SIMD type. Compile and link all of them in, then 
> detect the SIMD type at runtime and call the corresponding 
> module. (This is how the D array ops are currently implemented.)
>
> My experience with command line FPU switches is few users 
> understand what they do and even fewer use them correctly.
>
> In fact, I suspect that having a command line FPU switch is too 
> global a hammer. A pragma set in just the functions that need 
> it might be much better.
>

What wrong for scientist to write `-mcpu=native`?

> -------
>
> In any case, this is not a blocker for getting the library 
> designed, built and debugged.

Yes, but this is bad idea to have a set of versions for Phobos, 
is not it?

Ilya