Bitfield accessors

[bearophile]

Jarrett Billingsley:
> This isn't an entirely unbiased comparison.  If you used dmd and dmc, or gcc 
> and gdc, that would take out at least one very large variable: that dmd and 
> gcc have two completely different backends and optimizers.  From anecdotal 
> evidence I'd say the gcc (and by proxy, gdc) backend is far more mature than 
> dmd's when it comes to optimization.

I have tested what I use. I'll try gdc if I succed its installation, but I think its install procedure is more complex.

If you look at the ShedSkin installer I have helped for, you can see the not-win version is just the Python files and the C++ classes, while the Windows version is a WinRar-created (very compressed) "installer" that contains the same things plus the whole necessary parts of MinGW alredy set to go. Installing ShedSkin on Win is 1 click or little more. I presume dmd on Win can reach the same level of user-frieldlness... :-)

http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=142788

Bye,
bearophile