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
