08-Dec-2014 18:18, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d пишет:
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 08:33:16AM +0000, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote:
[...]
As with any of these situation the convoluted hardcoded for a specific
processor code, especially assembly language will always win. I don't
care about that, I care about the fastest comprehensible code that is
portable simply by compilation or execution. Based on this, Java does
well, so does some Groovy perhaps surprisingly, also Scala. C++ does
well especially with TBB (though as an API it leaves a lot to be
desired). D is OK but only using ldc2 or gdc, dmd sucks.
[...]
Yeah, I find in my own experience that gdc -O3 tends to produce code
that's consistently ~20% faster than dmd -O, especially in
compute-intensive code.
And that's not nearly enough. Also both LDC & GDC often can't inline
many functions from phobos due to separate compilation.
The downside is that gdc usually lags behind dmd
by one release, which, given the current rate of development in D, can
be quite a big difference in feature set available.
--
Dmitry Olshansky
