On 28-Aug-2015 18:01, Jack Stouffer wrote:
On Friday, 28 August 2015 at 11:53:20 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
On 28-Aug-2015 14:18, Temtaime wrote:
So comparing to llvm the idea of optimizing backend comes with:
1) LLVM optimizes code much better than DMD for now. And it's in active
development, so it always will be far from DMD.
In producing better code very it well may be. Faster - I don't think so.
2) LLVM has over 120k commits, it has many financial investments from
Google and Apple. Are you sure that ONE Walter can achieve what they
done ?
3) LLVM supports many platforms while DMD will never support anything
different from x86.
We do not need to do the new LLVM thing. Then the rest of argument is
destroyed.
You ignored probably the most important point in that post. Getting DMD
to work on ARM would be a huge undertaking, probably so large that I
don't think it will ever happen. This is a huge bummer because this
essentially means getting D on phones or cheap computers is a pipe dream.
Have you ever written a backend? What is the evidance?
Consider that x86 x64 bit support was done in about one year and a half
by Walter single-handedly that is without freezing the other activity on
DMD, of course. Aside from emitting different sequences of instructions
most IR-based optimizations stay the same.
--
Dmitry Olshansky
