Lower than C?
Jarrett Billingsley
kb3ctd2 at yahoo.com
Thu Dec 6 17:01:12 PST 2007
"Dan" <murpsoft at hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:fja3kq$2gvl$1 at digitalmars.com...
> bearophile Wrote:
>
> If one assumes that the D compiler optimizes correctly, then HLL is good.
> While Walter certainly is a talented compiler writer, like gcc, I doubt he
> can get even most of it right. For example, I don't think he's leveraging
> SSE2 for much and so on.
>
> The good thing about D is that you can very readily plug away in x86
> assembler. The bad thing is that we can't do x86-64 or any other kind of
> assembler just yet, and we still don't have compile-time code reflection.
If you use GDC, you can use ASM for any platform -- the downside being that
you have to deal with the *godawful* GCC assembler syntax (and with AT&T
syntax for x86[-64]).
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list