On Friday, 19 August 2016 at 23:59:43 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Code: https://github.com/dlang/phobos/pull/4613
Docs:
http://dtest.thecybershadow.net/artifact/website-e0b2b4609f1a8e4010ccbe9492ab4af3e3fdd2fb-ab9e77dd6d78136b1f0172e60f7b4f43/web/phobos-prerelease/std_experimental_checkedint.html
New policies implement NaN and saturation with relative ease. I
think it shouldn't be too hard to add bounds checks in a future
iteration. Anyhow, reviews would be very welcome.
BTW, there's something about which I've wondered before and which
applies here, so maybe you could clarify... If you have something
like std.algorithm.filter, you pass the filtering predicate
function by a template alias, so there's no overhead introduced
there (in the passing itself). But here the "hook" is not one
function but a series of functions. For convenience you use a
struct to aggregate those related functions, instead of passing
them individually through a series of template aliases. My
question is, how well do the compilers optimize away this 0-byte
/ 1-sizeof-byte, for this kind of use? Have there been situations
where you had to use abstractions with worse ergonomics (e.g.
template tuples, multiple template aliases, ...) to avoid the
cost?
