CTFE Status 2

[Stefan Koch via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 27 April 2017 at 08:51:17 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky 
wrote:
> On 4/27/17 4:15 AM, Stefan Koch wrote:
>> On Thursday, 16 February 2017 at 21:05:51 UTC, Stefan Koch 
>> wrote:
>>> [ ... ]
>> Hi Guys,
>>
>> As you already probably know some work has been done in the 
>> past week to
>> get an x86 jit rolling.
>>
>> It is designed to produce very simple code with _any_ 
>> optimization at all.
>>
>> Since optimization introduces heavy complexity down the road, 
>> even if at
>> first it looks very affordable. My opinion is : "_any_ 
>> optimization too
>> much."
>
> There is also trade-off of spending too much time doing an 
> optimization.
> That being said simple peep-hole optimizations may be well 
> worth the effort.
>
>>
>> This stance should make it possible to get some _really_ shiny
>> performance numbers for dconf.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Stefan

I should probably clarify;  I made a typo.
I was meaning to write "without _any_ optimization at all."
Peep-holing would be worth it for wanting to get the last drop of 
performance;
However in the specific case of newCTFE, the crappiest JIT will 
already be much faster then an optimized interpreter would be.

Small peephole optimization quickly turns into and endless source 
of bugs.