Ian Ollmann wrote:
stronger type checking seems like a good idea to me in general.
I agree, but I don't really want to break lots of code all at once, even if that code is being slightly more slack than it perhaps ought to be :-) Given that no-one has really objected to stronger type-checking here _per se_, then I see two ways forward: 1. Treat this as a regression: fix it and cause errors upon bad conversions, but risk breaking code. 2. Emit a warning in cases of converting "vector signed int" to "vector unsigned int", etc., and state that the behaviour will change to an error in a later version. Thoughts? Mark
