On 30.04.2012 1:54, Peter Alexander wrote:
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.
Right, nowdays any compiler is either smart enough or a dead meat that
nobody uses.
P.S. dmd is kind of work in progress ;)
--
Dmitry Olshansky
