16:17 <MajorLag> andrewrk, what's the plan once copy elision is merged? Will you launch into async rewrite right away? I ask because my 2 PRs should probably wait and rebase on a post-elision post-async version if we can expect such a beast relatively soon.

16:22 <Hejsil> Seems like LLVM 8 is scheduled for Feb 27th, so he might go into bugfix mode

16:32 <MajorLag> Fair enough. The interface reform PR contains a wicked ugly hack to deal with async, it would probably be better to merge that after the async rewrite regardless. Serialization could benefit from interface reform and copy elision, but those changes wouldn't be a big chore so that one could be merged whenever.

16:34 <MajorLag> assuming that either is going to be merged, that is.

16:37 <andrewrk> MajorLag, my current plan after copy elision merge is to merge pull requests (for those that want to be merged), yes bug fixes, and a couple other features tiehuis wanted, such as SIMD

16:37 <andrewrk> I don't think async rewrite is going to make it into 0.4.0 sadly, but hopefully we can squeeze some other features in instead

16:38 <andrewrk> 0.4.0 is currently scheduled for march 15

16:39 <MajorLag> what's the deal re: SIMD? I recall discussion, but not a confirmed choice.

17:02 <andrewrk> here's the issue: https://github.com/ziglang/zig/issues/903

17:02 <andrewrk> it's not fully spec'd out how it will work

17:03 <andrewrk> but my current plan is to pretty much expose the LLVM vector types as zig primitive types

17:04 <andrewrk> they will behave very much like integers

17:04 <andrewrk> and you can put them in structs and arrays, no problem

21:42 <wink_> I'm trying to create a zig interface to freetype2. I've used translate-c and one of the problems I've run into is that got some enum's with the same value. What is the "best practice" for fixing this?