On 07/02/2017 08:46 AM, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
Second, there are optimizations that can take place over "const" that cannot over "shared const" even assuming aliasing (such as if the compiler knows no other pointer was changed between two accesses).
Wouldn't that also fall within the realm of inclusion polymorphism?
The last point is that assuming no pointer aliasing is a fairly common optimization to take in C and C++, simply because of the huge performance gains it provides. It is so huge that it is sometimes turned on by default despite the fact it changes language semantics. It would be a pity to block any potential to have it in D.
Allowing the conversion does not preclude any optimization; after all there is no replacement of one with another. The conversion simply removes unnecessary restrictions.
Andrei
