On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 14:25:25 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 01:54:21 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
By language you usually mean a portable language, not machine
language.
I believe there are more platforms that have an assembler, but
not a C++ compiler and C++ libraries you want to use.
Huh? All platforms have an assembler.
You mean inline assembly? That's not really relevant.
Machine language benchmark the hardware, not the compiler.
It only means assembler reaches the theoretical limit of
performance by choosing right language abstractions, that you
wanted to benchmark.
What language abstractions? There are no abstractions in machine
language.
Also what's about cost/benefit ratio?
How do you benchmark cost/benefit?
By eyeballing the source.
Not objectively measurable in a meaningful way.
