Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

asperamanca@mastodon.socialA

asperamanca@mastodon.social

@asperamanca@mastodon.social
About
Posts
3
Topics
0
Shares
0
Groups
0
Followers
0
Following
0

View Original

Posts

Recent Best Controversial

  • "Bill why do you hate optional<T&> so much?" Bill:
    asperamanca@mastodon.socialA asperamanca@mastodon.social

    @malwareminigun Ah, I missed that detail.
    Well, that's a tradeoff to consider, of course.

    Uncategorized

  • "Bill why do you hate optional<T&> so much?" Bill:
    asperamanca@mastodon.socialA asperamanca@mastodon.social

    @malwareminigun Playing on compiler explorer with GCC trunk, consider
    https://compiler-explorer.com/z/hTb9dT8zq

    When you disable the lines returning ptr, and instead enable the lines returning optRef, the assemly is the same for me.

    And I tried to prevent the optimizer from being too smart with some random number generation.

    What am I missing?

    Uncategorized

  • "Bill why do you hate optional<T&> so much?" Bill:
    asperamanca@mastodon.socialA asperamanca@mastodon.social

    @malwareminigun @horenmar Did I miss a time warp, or which optional<T&> are you talking about?

    Wouldn't this be something compilers will optimize for, once they officially "know" about it?

    Uncategorized
  • Login

  • Login or register to search.
  • First post
    Last post
0
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups