System programming in D (Was: The God Language)

[so]

On Sat, 31 Dec 2011 03:12:38 +0200, Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw at ubuntu.com> wrote:

> On 31 December 2011 00:48, so <so at so.so> wrote:
>> On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 20:48:54 +0200, Walter Bright
>> <newshound2 at digitalmars.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/30/2011 7:06 AM, so wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I agree @inline (which will probably be an extension) in D should mean
>>>> force-inline.
>>>> Ignoring the impossible-to-inline cases (which in time should get
>>>> better),
>>>> adding @inline is a few minutes of editing.
>>>> It will just bypass the cost function and if it is not possible to
>>>> inline, pop
>>>> error.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sure, but I think you'll be very disappointed in that it isn't going to
>>> deliver the goods.
>>
>>
>> dmd_inl -O -inline test.d
>> dmd_inl -O -inline test_inl.d
>> time ./test
>>
>> real    0m4.686s
>> user    0m3.516s
>> sys     0m0.007s
>> time ./test_inl
>>
>> real    0m1.900s
>> user    0m1.503s
>> sys     0m0.007s
>> time ./test
>>
>
> *SNIP*
>
>>
>> void main()
>> {
>>        for(uint i=0; i<1_000_000_000; ++i)
>>                test();
>> }
>
> A better compiler would see that the function 'test' has no side
> effects, and it's return value is unused, so elimates the call to it
> completely as dead code.

It is just a dummy function that dmd rejected to inline, send me a better  
one (which won't use any libraries) and i'll use it :)