InKryption

If you want to enforce correctness within a given namespace, one thing you can do is make a test or comptime block which references all declarations: ``` comptime { //...

Is this open to more bikeshedding? If so, then I'll throw mine out there: `[simd N]T`.

Extra observation: when `a`'s fields aren't comprised of `comptime_int` (has an explicit tuple type), and thus is placed on the stack, the distance between the memory address of `a`, and...

Another observation: stage1 also allows coercion from a mutable tuple to a mutable slice, apparently.

A possible solution would be to just optionally take the index type as a parameter, where `null` is the same as using `usize`, or mayhaps some fixed type like `u32`.

Should this maybe be in the top level doc comment? E.g. `//!config min_zig_version 0.10.0-dev.2836+2360f8c49`.

Does using `@mulAdd` affect performance/precision significantly in either of these?

Hmm, if that is the case, is there any reason to not always use `@mulAdd`?

This wouldn't prevent this case: ``` const std = @import("std"); test { var foo = Foo{}; Foo.baz(foo); } const Foo = struct { // pretend this makes the address of...

I am going to push a commit to rectify doc comments, but for the record, all tests have passed: