Re:What Challenges and Trade-Offs Do Optimising Compilers Face?
by mhh__ on Thursday June 22, 2017 @02:24PM
(#14614237)
I was imagining direct language ties to (say) LLVM passes, and things like that.
Designing the language around optimizability is a good thing, e.g. C++'s "as if" rule (in [intro.execution] in standards after C++11 (or near there)). Some of these options, which may or may not be used for optimization, can also be very useful for code quality/correctness: e.g. Language enforced purity (of functions) (in D) can be very useful for optimization (It's inferred in most compilers, but it can at least save a trip) and being able to trust (even a D function pointer) to be pure.
Designing the language around optimizability is a good thing, e.g. C++'s "as if" rule (in [intro.execution] in standards after C++11 (or near there)). Some of these options, which may or may not be used for optimization, can also be very useful for code quality/correctness: e.g. Language enforced purity (of functions) (in D) can be very useful for optimization (It's inferred in most compilers, but it can at least save a trip) and being able to trust (even a D function pointer) to be pure.