On 25/08/13 23:11, Timon Gehr wrote:
Why would that be the case?
I don't know why it _need_ be the case, but it _is_ the case in practice right
now.
The precise example I cited of a for() loop with decreasing value, I tried
replacing using retro and iota -- and it was significantly slower.
Ditto foreach's over iota() -- even though in principle there is no conceptual
difference between foreach(i; m .. n) and foreach(i; iota(m, n)), and it ought
to be possible for the two to reduce to the same machine code, there is right
now a performance hit.
