I would think the compiler would be free to optimize this as a single load outside the loop - as Go has no volatile declaration (to inform the compiler that some other thread might of changed the value of *p)
> On Nov 30, 2018, at 11:58 AM, robert engels <reng...@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > It’s as simple as: > > var count = 1 > var p = &count > > func X() { > total :=0 > > for i:=0; i <1000000;i++ { > total = total + *p > } > } > > no ? > >> On Nov 30, 2018, at 11:48 AM, Mark Volkmann <r.mark.volkm...@gmail.com >> <mailto:r.mark.volkm...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> I think I failed to come up with a good code example. But suppose I need to >> do something with a pointer inside a loop that really does require >> dereferencing it and the pointer never changes inside the loop. In that case >> will the Go compiler optimize that so the dereference doesn't happen in each >> loop iteration? >> >> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:36 AM Jan Mercl <0xj...@gmail.com >> <mailto:0xj...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 6:16 PM Mark Volkmann <r.mark.volkm...@gmail.com >> <mailto:r.mark.volkm...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> > Will the Go compiler optimize the pointer dereference so it doesn't happen >> > in every loop iteration? If not, is it common practice to do that outside >> > the loop like this? >> > >> > myValue := *myPtr >> > for _, v := range values { >> > fmt.Printf("%v %v\n", myValue, v) >> > } >> >> There's no pointer dereference inside the loop. But there's an allocation >> inside the loop, on every iteration, that puts a pointer to a copy of >> myValue into an interface{} that's passed to fmt.Printf. The allocation can >> be probably avoided: >> >> myValue := interface{}(*myPtr) >> for _, v := range values { >> fmt.Printf("%v %v\n", myValue, v) >> } >> >> But the %v verb handle pointers in many cases well. If that holds for the >> type of *myPtr then simply: >> >> for _, v := range values { >> fmt.Printf("%v %v\n", myPtr, v) >> } >> >> is what could be good enough. >> >> -- >> -j >> >> >> >> -- >> R. Mark Volkmann >> Object Computing, Inc. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "golang-nuts" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com >> <mailto:golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout >> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "golang-nuts" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > <mailto:golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout > <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.