On 07/29/2012 10:22 AM, Chad J wrote:
> On 07/29/2012 11:54 AM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
>> ForwardRange!int r1 = inputRangeObject(map!"2 * a"(a1));
>> ForwardRange!int r2 = inputRangeObject(map!"a ^^ 2"(a1));
> IIRC, these are classes that come with all the typical runtime overhead,
> right?
Yes, inputRangeObject() allows runtime polymorphism over compile-time
polymorphism.
> I intend to try and keep the awesome mix of potentially optimal code
> that's also completely generalized. Introducing hard-to-inline vtable
> calls into the mix would run against that goal.
Yes, usual runtime vs. compile-time polymorphism considerations apply.
Ali
