[Kipters]

I think what he's saying is that instead of writing that in platform-specific C++ they could have worked on a Vector API and use that instead to automatically work in other (future) SIMD implementations of the same width.

A poster in another comment mentioned such API is being worked on, and what I described above is exactly how .NET is tackling this: they built a Vector API and are building optimizations like that in C# on top of that API, giving also developers the ability to write SIMD-oriented code in C# rather than resorting to platform-specific C++ and interop/JNI

In my opinion that's a better approach, it's discussed in great detail here https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/performance_improvemen...

[xmcqdpt2]

The Vector API exists to write SIMD code in Java. This is an intrinsic inserted by the JIT compiler. HotSpot intrinsics are always written in assembly or compiler IR because they are inserted in the generated assembly.

Arrays.sort() could very conceivably be called in a hot loop, so you really don't want to allocate Java objects in it.

[Kipters]

Yeah, that work in C# required a lot of other things to minimize allocations.

What I was thinking is something similar to how they implemented things like IndexOf [0] which is a pure C# implementation that gets translated by the JIT in C++ equivalent code. The advantage is of doing this kind of things this way is that when ARM adds a 256-bit wide SIMD extensions they will only need to support that as a Vector256 implementation to get that code working with no other changes.

[0]: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/2a1b52a1b691c42a7f407...