SIMD has a reputation for being complex. […] I think that’s wrong. SIMD can be simple to understand, and common “process N values at a time” SIMD code to speed up a naive for loop almost always follows the same general shape. Once you learn the basics, writing SIMD is just about as easy as a for loop.

Exercise for PL people: Why is the level of discourse so low here? What prevents the language (here, Zig) from including loops like this in their standard libraries? How does APL do it? (Hint: end←(codepoints>15)⍳0. How does the APL solution differ in terms of vectorizability? In terms of big-O complexity? How could that be addressed?)

Low-level implementation details on how Fil-C, a memory-safe, capability-oriented C compiler and runtime, is able to implement function calls efficiently while maintaining strong, well-defined memory-safety invariants:

Fil-C achieves memory safety even for programs that behave adversarially. That includes casting function pointers to the wrong signature and then calling them, exporting a function with one signature in one module and then importing it with a different signature in another, or even exporting a symbol as a function in one module and importing it as data in another (and vice-versa). Passing too few arguments, arguments of the wrong type, misusing va_list (including escaping it), expecting too many values to be returned - these are all things that the Fil-C calling convention either catches with a panic or ascribes safe behavior to.