Replacing the comma operator

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

Stewart Gordon wrote:
> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> <snip>
>> This has been a source of long discussion in C++ circles, and Walter 
>> and I have also discussed the matter several times. Defining order of 
>> evaluation has good benefits, and the loss in efficiency has with time 
>> been reduced to just a few corner cases that don't seem to justify the 
>> cost anymore. Note that operations can still be evaluated in parallel 
>> as long as there's no dependencies between them.
> 
> So the compiler would be allowed to parallelise only if it can determine 
> that the two subexpressions don't depend on each other?

Yes.

> This could get 
> complicated when you consider calculations that are involved enough to 
> be worth parallelising in the first place.

Quite the contrary, in fact. Involved calculations in a given expression 
entail more often than not complicated operations as opposed to 
complicated updates.


Andrei