Inherent code performance advantages of D over C?

[Iain Buclaw]

On 14 December 2013 04:08, Walter Bright <newshound2 at digitalmars.com> wrote:
> On 12/13/2013 11:07 AM, David Nadlinger wrote:
>>
>> LDC in fact implements DMD-style inline assembly (occasionally there are
>> bugs,
>> though, as it's a complete reimplementation).
>
>
> Thank you! That's awesome!
>

The implementation of which existed in GDC first, and was released as
dual GPL/BSD license to allow into LDC devs to use and improve (they
added 64bit assembler support for instance, years before DMD got 64bit
support), and then subsequently dropped from GDC for a number of valid
reasons:

1) Transition towards making a platform/target agnostic frontend implementation.

2) Don't and will never implement the DMD-style calling convention, so
all inline assembly in druntime and phobos actually doesn't work with
GDC - there's actually a bug report about GDC incorrectly pre-defining
D_InlineAsm and friends because of this.

3) It is a really big WAT on having two conflicting styles, one for
x86, another for everything else.

4) This and other x86 hacks were a problem with code reviewers from GCC.

Though saying that, whilst DMD-style was not ideal, neither is
GDC-style either, as it requires parser changes, and adds a new class
to handle them in the frontend.