On Sunday, 29 April 2012 at 21:18:40 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
Le 29/04/2012 03:06, bearophile a écrit :
Jonathan M Davis:
* foreach_reverse is essentially redudant at this point (not
to mention
confusing if combined with delegates), since we have retro.
retro() can't replace foreach_reverse until the front-end
demonstrability produces asm code equally efficient.
Loops _must_ be fully efficient, they are a basic language
construct,
this is very important. Even foreach() is sometimes not equally
efficient as a for() in some cases...
This is an implementation issue and shouldn't be an argument
for language design.
The 'sufficiently smart compiler' argument is old and invalid.
Please do not use it.
