UFCS for D

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Jacob Carlborg" <doob at me.com> wrote in message 
news:jl3kar$ie4$1 at digitalmars.com...
> On 2012-03-30 04:05, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> "Walter Bright"<newshound2 at digitalmars.com>  wrote in message
>>>
>>> True, but I upgraded recently to 64 bit Win 7, with a 6 core processor 
>>> and
>>> SSD drive. Reddit seems a lot zippier :-)
>>
>> I don't understand why people think it's ok for basic, basic shit that 
>> would
>> have ran fine on a Pentium 1 (and less) to now require what quite 
>> literally
>> is a super-fucking-computer-on-the-desktop just to run acceptably.
>>
>> Seriously, what the fuck's the point of buying all this insanely powerful
>> hardware if software just turns the damn thing right back into a fucking
>> single-core P1? That's just insane. People are seriously fucking bat-shit
>> crazy.
>
> Have you seen this:
>
> http://hallicino.hubpages.com/hub/_86_Mac_Plus_Vs_07_AMD_DualCore_You_Wont_Believe_Who_Wins
>
> They compare and old Macintosh from the 80's against a fairly new PC.
>

Yea, I've seen that. It's a very good article, though. Although I've been 
saying this since before that article, and even before multi-cores. Contrary 
to the title, I wasn't at all surprised which won ;)

Of course, I don't expect software to be as super-fine-tuned as it was on, 
say, the Apple 2 or Atari 2600. There *is* definitely some value in loosing 
a certain amount of performance to abstractions, up to a point. But we've 
blown way, way, WAAAY beyond that point.

It's sickening how much gratuitous waste there is in a lot of "modern" 
software, and really for not much benefit, as D proves.