Looking at the implementation, it is implemented in C++. I'd rather have an implementation using the new Vector API (still in incubation). It would be more Java like and provide a good demo for this new API.
It seems like you're saying you'd rather have a slower implementation given that a bunch of single instructions useful for this sort of thing aren't available in the Vector API and must be built from sequences of Vector methods that themselves must be implemented using multiple instructions.
I think he's referring to something similar to what .NET has been doing in the last few versions. They introduced a new Vector API that abstracts platform-specific SIMD instructions. The end result is the same, code using Vector128 will be directly compiled to equivalent AVX opcodes on x86/x64 and NEON on ARM* as if you would have written that directly, except that now you can add these kinds of optimizations across many architectures with a single codebase
This [0] post by Stephen Toub goes in GREAT detail on that
You mean this IntVector[0], which I assume is the Java experimental API anthony88 was referring to, correct? If that operation being missing is a blocker, I feel there may be some middle ground other than implementing the whole thing in C++ (like adding it or fast tracking work on this API)