On 2011-03-03 16:35, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Thu, 03 Mar 2011 10:28:00 -0500, Jacob Carlborg <d...@me.com> wrote:
On 2011-03-03 14:12, bearophile wrote:
Trass3r:
I think something should be done about this. Couldn't Appender be
implemented without using a pointer to a struct?
There's no need for this, there is __ctfe (that thanks to fixing bug
4177 is usable in pure functions too), that allows to create two
paths inside the Appender, one for CT and one for runtime.
Bye,
bearophile
So much for the "having the same implementation for the compile time
function and the runtime function".
Actually, I think even if Appender wasn't implemented via pImpl style,
it wouldn't be available to CTFE because it uses implementation details
from the GC and runtime (for performance).
I think a __ctfe thing is probably the right thing to do. Note that
nobody cares about append performance in CTFE because it only affects
compile time, not runtime, so the CTFE version can be really foolish and
simple, and nobody cares if it's "implemented the same".
-Steve
Yeah, but Walter and/or Andrei has mentioned that as a feature. Having
the same code for compile time and runtime.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
