On Wednesday, 10 May 2017 at 14:03:58 UTC, Biotronic wrote:
On Wednesday, 10 May 2017 at 11:45:05 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner
wrote:
[CTFE slow]
First, as you may know, Stefan Koch is working on an improved
CTFE engine that will hopefully make things a lot better.
As he already pointed out, it won't help with the introspection
template costs, though.
As for making the code faster right now, could this be done
with mixin templates instead?
Something like:
[...]
This will move from CTFE to templates, sure, but templates aren't
that fast, either.
I'll experiment with your suggestion regardless to see what it'll
result in, but I'm not very optimistic about that solving the
issue.
(tests indicate this compiles but doesn't run, and I'm helping
you on company time, so I can't fix everything right now :p)
Thank you, I'll gladly take any advice and try to optimize
things, though my primary purpose with this post was not to ask
for help (for once :p ), but to publicize my experience with
compile time introspection costs as a reference for others (and
because a certain someone asked me too - you know who you are).
[...]
A few things here - functions.fn would not do what you want,
and neither would __traits(identifier).
functions.fn would treat "fn" like a part of name, not a string
value, so this will make the poor compiler barf.
__traits(identifier, fn) expects fn to be a symbol, while here
it's a string. In fact, it's exactly the string you want
__traits to return.
Lastly, you'll still need a mixin, whether it's for
__traits(identifier, fn) or just fn - they're just strings.
Right, but it'll still be one fairly short, readable line in the
end (that should be faster than CTFE).
