bearophile Wrote: > > If you care for performance then *always* time your code (in this case the > two alternative versions with and without array ops), because what Walter and > docs say is always less important that what the reality is.
Of course I would time the code; as it stands though, the version with array operations doesn't even compile (or link, rather), due to the bug I reported. > >I've yet to find situations where array expressions have given me a speed-up >over the normal code generated by LDC (if performance is quite important then >don't use DMD). I would like to use LDC, but my main target platform is Windows, and consensus seems to be that LDC isn't usable there. Or is it possible to use it if I don't need exception handling? Can it generate DLLs? In any case, no LDC binaries for Windows seem to be available. What's the status with GDC? I think it was resurrected a while back; is there a current version available? Again, Windows? As far as I can tell at this point, I'm stuck with DMD for Windows development, for better or for worse. For now, I'll probably revert to loops for the offending code sections and replace them with hand-written inline SSE assembly if profiling shows a need for this. The simple loops I'm using here shouldn't be hard to write by hand. Still, it would be great if at some point DMD could do it by itself. Probably a distant dream at this point... Clemens
