Good project: stride() with constant stride value

[John Colvin via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 4 March 2016 at 16:45:42 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
> Currently we have a very useful stride() function that allows 
> spanning a random access range with a specified step, e.g. 0, 
> 3, 6, 9, ... for step 3.
>
> I've run some measurements recently and it turns out a 
> compile-time-known stride is a lot faster than a variable. So I 
> was thinking to improve Stride(R) to take an additional 
> parameter: Stride(R, size_t step = 0). If step is 0, then use a 
> runtime-valued stride as until now. If nonzero, Stride should 
> use that compile-time step.
>
> Takers?
>
>
> Andrei

Surely after inlining (I mean real inlining, not dmd) it makes no 
difference, a constant is a constant?

I remember doing tests of things like that and finding that not 
only did it not make a difference to performance, ldc produced 
near-identical asm either way.