Standard way to supply hints to branches

[Manu]

On Thu, 12 Sept 2024 at 04:26, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d <
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:

> On 9/11/2024 3:23 PM, Manu wrote:
> > Even if you can manage to convince a compiler to write the output you're
> > alleging,
>
> Alleging? I cut and pasted what dmd did and what gcc did. My gcc may
> behave
> differently than yours, as there are many versions of it.
>

This is literally my point...

> I would never imagine for a second that's a reliable strategy. The
> > optimiser could do all kinds of things... even though in all my
> experiments, it
> > does exactly what I predicted it would.
>
> Did you use -O?
>

I used -O2... I don't imagine that would have made a difference though? I
don't think I've ever seen anyone use -O before.

dmd does what I predicted it would, as it is designed to operate that way.
> If
> gcc doesn't do what you want, there's nothing I can do about it.
>

You're not meant to do anything about it; just accept that your suggestion
to rely on contorting the code and a prayer that the compiler emits the
code you'd like to see (it doesn't) is not a reasonable suggestion.
This needs a proper solution.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20240912/81ab92d3/attachment.htm>