I'm one of them, so please just believe me instead of trying to correct me ;)… No you aren’t. Or rather, there’s absolutely no reason for me to believe you are

I'm one of them, so please just believe me instead of trying to correct me ;)… No you aren’t. Or rather, there’s absolutely no reason for me to believe you are. It's an ongoing problem the project talks about that there aren't enough newcomers ready to write more SIMD code with good enough quality. Good programmers are in short supply across the entire industry. Like anything else it’s just a matter of practice. The top reply is "just do this other thing that the article said was unworkable", so not doing that would be a start. A) Get a thicker skin. It’s not the end of the world when people leave comments related to the topic at hand. B) x86inc.asm isn’t a particularly interesting approach to programming assembly. Other people mostly only target one CPU architecture as they're less important,… If hardware portability is a goal then handwritten assembly is even more wasteful. It's similar to how x264 was better than every commercial competitor while working for free, simply because they took more time to think about what they were doing. A lot of it simply comes down to sheer man hours and the quantity/quality of bug reports. No 4d chess, no great geniuses, just “good enough” persistence. Anyway, the problem with handwriting assembly is that such programs are trivial in their complexity and/or given unusually strong guarantees.