Pedro J. Estébanez

> Can be rebased now that the first commit was merged. Done. I was just now wondering why GitHub didn't just subsume the superfluous commit. Didn't that use to be...

Looks good. I'd only suggest using `likely()`.

> [...] an expression like `Array({1, 2})` becomes ambiguous about whether it invokes the initializer list constructor or the vector constructor [...] Would making the `Vector` constructor `explicit` avoid it...

I'm not sure about the status of this conern: > [...] an expression like `Array({1, 2})` becomes ambiguous about whether it invokes the initializer list constructor or the vector constructor...

> [...] I think one of the changes suggested that I cast to a 16bit int and then shift 16 bits, which I think wouldn't work due to bit limitation...

Code-wise and rationale-wise, this looks good to me. Functionality-wise (perf, etc.) I would leave some benchmarking to others to really know how beneficial this is in real world cases. Besides,...

~@Anixias, I'm not completely sure your issue is due to resource loading, but could you give this PR a try?~ ~@mrTag, once again I'm summoning you, this time for testing...

There's still an issue to fix before testing. I'll write another comment when ready.

This is ready for testing, so this comment is relevant again: > @Anixias, I'm not completely sure your issue is due to resource loading, but could you give this PR...

@mrTag, I just realized a silly mutex mistake. I've fixed it and improved a number of other things.