Impressed

[Stuart]

On Friday, 27 July 2012 at 02:41:21 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 04:09:36 +0200
> "Stuart" <stugol at gmx.com> wrote:
>
>> I can't think of ANY situation where goto would be the only 
>> viable option.
>
> Duff's device.

According to Wikipedia, Duff's device (about which, until just 
now, I knew nothing) can be implemented without goto. Then again, 
this might be due to "features" of C++ that are not present in D.

In any case, isn't it the job of the compiler to unroll loops? 
Why should the coder have to do this himself? Unless of course 
he's using a thin shitty wrapper over assembly language that 
claims falsely to be a high-level language - i.e. C.