"Jonathan M Davis" wrote in message
news:mailman.477.1349164468.5162.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
>
> By the way, why is it not used in static if? That's what most of us would
> have
> expected (and it frequently seems to trip people up). I assume that it's
> due
> to some implementation deta
On Tuesday, October 02, 2012 09:45:10 Don Clugston wrote:
> On 01/10/12 21:30, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> > On Monday, 1 October 2012 at 19:22:37 UTC, Philippe Sigaud wrote:
> >> Something I wanted to ask for a long time: is there any runtime speed
> >> penalty in usin
On 01/10/12 21:30, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Monday, 1 October 2012 at 19:22:37 UTC, Philippe Sigaud wrote:
Something I wanted to ask for a long time: is there any runtime speed
penalty in using __ctfe?
No. What happens is when it goes to the compile the runtime code, __ctfe
is a constant false
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 9:30 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Monday, 1 October 2012 at 19:22:37 UTC, Philippe Sigaud wrote:
>>
>> Something I wanted to ask for a long time: is there any runtime speed
>> penalty in using __ctfe?
>
>
> No. What happens is when it goes t
On Monday, 1 October 2012 at 19:22:37 UTC, Philippe Sigaud wrote:
Something I wanted to ask for a long time: is there any runtime
speed penalty in using __ctfe?
No. What happens is when it goes to the compile the runtime code,
__ctfe is a constant false, so then the optimizer can see it is
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 8:36 PM, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
[Creating a new thread for this]
__ctfe exists purely so that you can provide an alternate
implementation which
works at compile time when the normal implementation doesn't
(since CTFE _is_
more restrictive in what it allows
