Inherent code performance advantages of D over C?

[Paulo Pinto]

Am 12.12.2013 21:08, schrieb H. S. Teoh:
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 08:57:42PM +0100, Max Samukha wrote:
>> On Thursday, 12 December 2013 at 17:56:12 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>>
>>> 11. inline assembler being a part of the language rather than an
>>> extension that is in a markedly different format for every
>>> compiler
>>
>> Ahem. If we admit that x86 is not the only ISA in exsistence, then
>> what is (under)specified here http://dlang.org/iasm.html is a
>> platform-specific extension.
>
> I've always wondered about that. What is D supposed to do with asm
> blocks when compiling for a CPU that *isn't* x86?? What *should* a
> conforming compiler do? Translate x86 asm into the target CPU's
> instructions?  Abort compilation? None of those options sound
> particularly appealing to me.
>
>
> T
>


I already argued a few times here that although inline assembly seems 
convenient, I do favour the use of external macro assemblers.

There will always be some ISAs that are more special than others. So I 
rather have clean higher level code that drops out to assembly, that 
having version() for each processor and lack thereof.

So far I have only used dmd, but as far as I know both gdc and ldc don't 
follow the same asm syntax anyway.

--
Paulo