On 16 July 2014 15:14, Daniel Murphy via Digitalmars-d <[email protected]> wrote: > "Johannes Pfau" wrote in message news:[email protected]... > > >> > The problem is not 'this feature is too complex', the problems is >> > that it's more complex than necessary. >> >> So what's necessary in this specific case? > > > Use intrinsics with a nice template wrapper. They get inlined, the unused > function bodies get stripped, and the debug info/typeinfo is just as big a > problem as it is for every other function in your program. > > Intrinsics get us away from our current 'there is no portable way to do > this' situation.
No they don't. Intrinsics make things worse. > They are _trivial_ to implement for any of the compilers. No they aren't, unless you are talking specifically about volatile., in which case, that depends... > I have complete faith that it is possible to make a performant wrapper for > both the single-register read/write and the struct pattern you posted. And > if I'm wrong - we can add a volatile type modifier later! > > I just don't see volatile pulling it's weight. Hardware access is supposed to be correct, not performant. Regards Iain
