Thanks Nazriel,
It is very cool you are able to narrow the gap to within 1.5x of
c++ with a few simple changes.
I checked your version, there are 3 changes (correct me if i
missed any):
* Change the (float) constructor from v= [x,x,x] to v[0] = x;
v[1] = x; v[2] = x;
* Get rid of the (float[]) constructor and use 3 floats instead
* Change class methods to final
The first change alone shaved off 220ms off the runtime, the 2nd
one cuts 130ms
and the 3rd one cuts 60ms.
Lesson learned: by very very careful about dynamic arrays.
On Friday, 31 May 2013 at 05:15:11 UTC, nazriel wrote:
After few fast changes I manage to get such results:
[raz@d3 tmp]$ ./a.out
rendering time 276 ms
[raz@d3 tmp]$ ./test
346 ms, 814 μs, and 5 hnsecs
./a.out being binary compiled with clang++ ./test.cxx
-std=c++11 -lSDL -O3
./test being binary compiled with ldmd2 -O3 -release -inline
-noboundscheck ./test.d (Actually I used rdmd with
--compiler=ldmd2 but I omitted it because it was rather long
cmd line :p)
Here is source code with changes I applied to D-code (I hope
you don't mind repasting it): http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/84bb308d
I am sure there is way more room for improvements and at
minimum achieving C++ performance.
