Hey, I'm not talking about 20% speedloss here with VC++. Just the times for 1000 empty playouts on 9x9, not using any sort of multithreading: VS debug configuration: 15257 VS release config (optimized): 756 C::B mingw-w64 no optimizations: 498 C::B mingw-w64 -O3 -fexpensive-optimizations -march=corei7-avx: 108
This of course clearly looks as this is certainly my fault... But right now I can't find what I'm doing wrong here... and so I have to miss out those handy VS-comfort features and continue with C::B + mingw-w64. And the VS profiler results looks pretty much like what I got, when I last used VerySleepy on my code compiled with mingw. No super drastic bottlenecks just general slowness it seems. Mingw-w64 makes it impossible to profile the code, but mingw has performance issues as well for me, so I'm using it only when i need profile data (not as drastic as VC++, but about factor 3). 2014-04-30 23:24 GMT+02:00 Aja Huang <[email protected]>: > I wrote my Go program Erica completely in Visual Studio and had no problem > at all. It might be around 20% slower on Windows than on Linux, but > compared to other more important factors 20% loss in speed is not really > significant. Maybe VS profiler can tell why your program ran awfully slow > in debug mode. > > Aja > > 2014-04-30 21:38 GMT+01:00 Marc Landgraf <[email protected]>: > > Hey, >> in the past I tried VS again and again, and in the end always returned >> back to Code::Blocks... It really feels like VS and me won't find together. >> Actually, after your comment I tried it again today, but even after >> spending a decent amount of time of porting it, the program ran awfully >> slow in debug mode, and crashed, as soon as the VC++ compiler tried to >> optimize it. (For reasonable performance I need optimization with mingw-w64 >> as well) >> Maybe it is just me and my terrible way of coding... But Visual Studio >> and Visual C++ I can't handle properly. >> And with Code::Blocks, I fooled around with various versions of GCC, and >> ended with mingw-w64, which gave me by far the best performance among those >> supporting the for me relevant C++11-features. >> >> Marc >> >> >> 2014-04-30 11:01 GMT+02:00 Aja Huang <[email protected]>: >> >>> Hey Marc, >>> >>> 2014-04-30 8:37 GMT+01:00 Marc Landgraf <[email protected]>: >>> >>> Hi, >>>> my bot is still under construction, but written entirely under C++11. >>>> So few comments: >>>> General: >>>> Most compilers, especially if you are using Windows, still have >>>> problems with C++11 and it's new multithreading library. Right now I'm >>>> using mingw-w64-4.8.1 as it has the required support for <thread>, even so >>>> it is done with some workaround via winpthreads, and gives a decently fast >>>> code. But I'm also interested if anyone else can share his experience with >>>> other compilers. (for windows) >>>> >>> >>> Why don't you use Visual Studio 2013? CTP_Nov2013 supports a lot of new >>> C++11 features. >>> >>> >>> http://blogs.msdn.com/b/vcblog/archive/2013/11/18/announcing-the-visual-c-compiler-november-2013-ctp.aspx >>> >>> Aja >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Computer-go mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Computer-go mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Computer-go mailing list > [email protected] > http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >
_______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
