Overloading Lazy Vs. Non-Lazy

[dsimcha]

An issue that's come up here several times before is that enforce()
effectively disables inlining of the function it's used in.  From reading some
disassemblies, the reason seems to be because of all the ASM code that's
required for lazy parameters.  I wonder if either of the following is feasible:

1.  When a function takes a lazy parameter, the compiler automatically
generates two versions under the hood:  One that actually takes a non-lazy
parameter and is used when the value is known at compile time and another that
works like current lazy functions.  The only problem here is that this might
create issues when using function pointers/delegates.

2.  Allow overloading of lazy and non-lazy functions, with the rule that the
lazy version gets called whenever the value must be computed at runtime and
the non-lazy version gets called if the value is statically known and thus
there's no evaluation to speak of.