On Thursday, 14 July 2022 at 13:00:24 UTC, ryuukk_ wrote:
On Thursday, 14 July 2022 at 05:30:58 UTC, Siarhei Siamashka
wrote:
On Tuesday, 12 July 2022 at 13:23:36 UTC, ryuukk_ wrote:
I wonder if DMD/LDC/GDC have built in tools to profile and
track performance
Linux has a decent system wide profiler:
https://perf.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page
And there are other useful tools, such as callgrind. To take
advantage of all these tools, DMD/LDC/GDC only need to provide
debugging symbols in the generated binaries, which they
already do. Profiling applications to identify performance
bottlenecks is very easy nowadays.
I am not talking about linux, and i am not talking about 3rd
party tools
I am talking about the developers of DMD/LDC/GDC, do they
profile the compilers, do they provide ways to monitor/track
performance? do they benchmark specific parts of the compilers?
I am not talking about the output of valgrind
Zig also has: https://ziglang.org/perf/ (very slow to load)
Having such thing is more useful than being able to plug
valgrind god knows how into the compiler and try to decipher
what does what and what results correspond to what internally,
and what about a graph over time to catch regressions?
DMD is very fast at compiling code, so i guess Walter doing
enough work to monitor all of that
LDC on the other hand.. they'd benefit a lot by having such
thing in place
Running valgrind on the compiler is completely trivial. Builtin
profilers are often terrible. LDC and GDC and dmd all have
instrumenting profilers builtin, of varying quality. gprof in
particular is somewhat infamous.
dmd isn't particularly fast, it does a lot of unnecessary work.
LDC is slow because LLVM is slow.
We need a graph over time, yes.
