Le 15/04/2012 09:23, ReneSac a écrit : > On Sunday, 15 April 2012 at 02:56:21 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: >>> On Saturday, 14 April 2012 at 19:51:21 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling >>> wrote: >>>> GDC has all the regular gcc optimization flags available IIRC. The >> > >
I notice the 2D array is declared int ct[512][2]; // C++ int ct[2][512]; // D Any particular reason for this ? May this impede the cache utilization ? As for the executable size, the D compiler links the druntime and libraries statically in the binary while I would believe g++ links them dynamically.
