dmd codegen improvements

[Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 02:02:57 UTC, rsw0x wrote:
> On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 01:20:27 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
>> On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 00:00:09 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>>>
>>> The gdc version, by contrast, inlines *everything*,
>>
>> This could be why I've observed performance differentials in 
>> dmd for doing some manual for loops rather than using the 
>> stuff in std.algorithms.
>
> ldc and gdc typically produce output nearly the same as 
> handwritten loops for ranges.

Which is really what we need to be happening with ranges. The 
fact that they make code so much more idiomatic helps a _lot_, 
making code faster to write and easier to understand and 
maintain, but if we're taking performance hits from it, then we 
start losing out to C++ code pretty quickly, which is _not_ what 
we want.

- Jonathan M Davis