Don Wrote:
> Jeremie Pelletier wrote:
> > David Gileadi Wrote:
> >
> >> Daniel Keep wrote:
> >>> Jeremie Pelletier wrote:
> If a function has both an asm and D implementations inside its body, and
> the D version can be executed at compile time, but the asm one is much
> faster a
Jeremie Pelletier wrote:
David Gileadi Wrote:
Daniel Keep wrote:
Jeremie Pelletier wrote:
If a function has both an asm and D implementations inside its body, and the D
version can be executed at compile time, but the asm one is much faster at
runtime. Is it possible to have the compiler us
David Gileadi Wrote:
> Daniel Keep wrote:
> > Jeremie Pelletier wrote:
> >> If a function has both an asm and D implementations inside its body, and
> >> the D version can be executed at compile time, but the asm one is much
> >> faster at runtime. Is it possible to have the compiler use the D c
Daniel Keep wrote:
Jeremie Pelletier wrote:
If a function has both an asm and D implementations inside its body, and the D
version can be executed at compile time, but the asm one is much faster at
runtime. Is it possible to have the compiler use the D code path at compile
time (ie to fill in
Jeremie Pelletier wrote:
> If a function has both an asm and D implementations inside its body, and the
> D version can be executed at compile time, but the asm one is much faster at
> runtime. Is it possible to have the compiler use the D code path at compile
> time (ie to fill in enums and wh
If a function has both an asm and D implementations inside its body, and the D
version can be executed at compile time, but the asm one is much faster at
runtime. Is it possible to have the compiler use the D code path at compile
time (ie to fill in enums and whatnot), and have the asm version a
