Am Mon, 29 Sep 2014 15:04:03 -0700 schrieb Andrei Alexandrescu <seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org>:
> On 9/29/14, 10:16 AM, Paulo Pinto wrote: > > Personally, I would go just for (b) with compiler support for > > increment/decrement removal, as I think it will be too complex having to > > support everything and this will complicate all libraries. > > Compiler already knows (after inlining) that ++i and --i cancel each > other, so we should be in good shape there. -- Andrei That helps with very small, inlined functions until Marc Schütz's work on borrowed pointers makes it redundant by unifying scoped copies of GC, RC and stack pointers. In any case inc/dec elision is an optimization and and not an enabling feature. It sure is on the radar and can be improved later on. -- Marco
