I just created a PR aimed at replacing the few pieces of Phobos
that use TickDuration in their API, and it involves creating the
std.benchmark module to hold the updated benchmarking functions,
since they can't be overloads of the existing ones in
std.datetime given that return types are
LOL. I got the title wrong - std.benchmarking instead of
std.benchmark. Oh well...
- Jonathan M Davis
Should the examples have `pragma(inline, false)` on the
benchmarked functions? I'm not so worried about inlining as I
am about const folding the benchmarked expressions away.
Concerning the module review I tend to agree with you. It
would only be ... well if I said in std.datetime the functions
On Monday, 5 October 2015 at 15:51:58 UTC, Marco Leise wrote:
Should the examples have `pragma(inline, false)` on the
benchmarked functions? I'm not so worried about inlining as I
am about const folding the benchmarked expressions away.
I'm not sure that it's a good idea to start pasting
