On Tuesday, 5 January 2016 at 13:09:55 UTC, Etienne Cimon wrote:
On Tuesday, 5 January 2016 at 10:11:36 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
On Thursday, 31 December 2015 at 08:23:26 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
[...]
vibe.d _was_ faster than Go. I redid the measurements recently
once I wrote an MQTT broker in Rust, and it was losing to
boost::asio, Rust's mio, Go, and Java. I told Soenke about it.
I know it's vibe.d and not my code because after I got the
disappointing results I wrote bindings from both boost::asio
and mio to my D code and the winner of the benchmarks shifted
to the D/mio combo (previously it was Rust - I figured the
library was the cause and not the language and I was right).
I'd've put up new benchmarks already, I'm only waiting so I
can show vibe.d in a good light.
Atila
The Rust mio library doesn't seem to be doing any black magic.
I wonder how libasync could be optimized to match it.
Have you used perf(or similar) to attempt to find bottlenecks yet?
If you use linux and LDC or GDC, I found it worked fine for my
needs. Just compile it with optimizations & frame
pointers(-fno-omit-frame-pointers for GDC and -disable-fp-elim
for LDC) or dwarf debug symbols. I can't remember which generates
a better callstack right now, actually, so it's probably worth
playing around with under the --call-graph flag(fp or dwarf).
Perf is a bit hard to understand if you've never used it before,
but it's also very powerful.
Bye.
