Thoughts about D

[Iain Buclaw]

On 30 November 2017 at 04:29, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
> On 11/29/2017 7:15 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>>
>> I wouldn't have expected assertions to cost much more than however much it
>> costs to evaluate the expression being asserted unless the assertion
>> fails.
>> Now, even that can slow down a program a fair bit, depending on what's
>> being
>> asserted and how many assertions there are, but it's not something that I
>> would have expected to vary particular between C and D. It doesn't
>> surprise
>> me that the generated code would be larger than you'd get for the same
>> assertions in C because how assertions are handled when they fail is quite
>> different, but I would expect the assertions themselves to cost about the
>> same in terms of performance as long as they don't fail. What's going on
>> that's making them so much worse?
>
>
> The code *size* causes problems because it pushes the executing code out of
> the cache. Another issue (I should check this again) was doing null checks
> on member function calls, which is not necessary since if they're null it'll
> seg fault.
>

This is only a problem if you (dmd) are not able to move code blocks
into hot and cold paths?