Skip to content

Shall we split the std::simd module into a crate separate from std? #525

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
gnzlbg opened this issue Jul 15, 2018 · 2 comments
Closed

Shall we split the std::simd module into a crate separate from std? #525

gnzlbg opened this issue Jul 15, 2018 · 2 comments

Comments

@gnzlbg
Copy link
Contributor

gnzlbg commented Jul 15, 2018

I have a pretty much equivalent implementation of stdsimd that follows the RFC in https://github.com/gnzlbg/ppv

Given that:

  • the stabilization path for std::simd is not clear yet, and that stabilization might take a while
  • there are issues with some targets failing with core upstream, e.g., due to linkage issues
  • std::simd costs most of the CI time of the stdsimd repo,

I'd like to discuss whether we should split std::simd into a crate separate from std (not necessarily mine, we can put the current implementation 1:1 as is in the nursery).

Splitting the crate might let us sync upstream more often and without breakage with stdsimd, significantly reducing the amount of churn we are seeing.

cc @alexcrichton


This basically turns rust-lang-nursery/stdsimd into stdarch, and the current std::simd into a crates on crates.io that people can just use with nightly in an opt-in way.

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

Seems reasonable to me!

@hdevalence
Copy link
Contributor

Hi, I was using core::simd. Would it be possible to not remove it until the replacement is available on crates.io?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants