start on SIMD documentation

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 1/16/12 1:32 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 1/16/2012 8:38 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> Either approach should work perfectly fine; it "cheats in style" by
>> using an
>> existing language construct that exactly matches the special-cased
>> capability.
>> The current approach cheats badly - it messes with the language's
>> fabric by
>> defining a construct that's not a function but looks like one.
>
> You're right, it is cheating.
>
>> I'd be in your debt if you could at least do the right thing when
>> defining new
>> intrinsics.
>
> We can talk about that some more. At some point, there's going to have
> to be some compiler magic going on.

OK. The overarching point is that the magic should be virtually 
indistinguishable from using the regular constructs. It's an 
optimization, and just like with any other optimization, you don't 
expect it to change the meaning of a construct.

Andrei