Re: LDC 0.12.0 has been released
On Saturday, 26 October 2013 at 02:21:37 UTC, deadalnix wrote: The explanation is quite simple. LLVM understand C and C++ runtime. It doesn't understand D runtime (LDC is doing some work in that regard, but it is still limited). So you see a difference between C and C++ as some optimization will be done in C/C++ (for instance heap to stack promotion) when it won't be done in D. While this is true in general I don't think that it explains the difference in the mentioned benchmark. A PRNG does not use too much of the C runtime. I believe that the IR generated by LDC could be improved and that the difference in speed is caused by this. Regards Kai
Re: LDC 0.12.0 has been released
On 10/25/2013 03:50 AM, ilya-stromberg wrote: It depends. Two benchmarks of different languages and compilers: http://togototo.wordpress.com/2013/07/23/benchmarking-level-generation-go-rust-haskell-and-d/ http://togototo.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/benchmarks-round-two-parallel-go-rust-d-scala-and-nimrod/ I think it's answer for your question. For example, Clang (LLVM C) is fastest, LDC (LLVM D) has 2-nd place, but LLVM-GHC (LLVM Haskell) ~ 2 times slower. They also show non-llvm compilers like D in that chart for compassion. I wonder where would C# stand if it's added to that list. I wouldn't like it if it performs any better than LDC though! ;-)
Re: LDC 0.12.0 has been released
On 10/25/2013 03:50 AM, ilya-stromberg wrote: It depends. Two benchmarks of different languages and compilers: http://togototo.wordpress.com/2013/07/23/benchmarking-level-generation-go-rust-haskell-and-d/ http://togototo.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/benchmarks-round-two-parallel-go-rust-d-scala-and-nimrod/ I think it's answer for your question. For example, Clang (LLVM C) is fastest, LDC (LLVM D) has 2-nd place, but LLVM-GHC (LLVM Haskell) ~ 2 times slower. They also show non-llvm compilers like DMD in that chart, for compassion. I wonder where would C# stand if it's added to the list. I wouldn't like it if it performs any better than LDC though! ;-)
Re: LDC 0.12.0 has been released
On 10/25/2013 03:50 AM, ilya-stromberg wrote: It depends. Two benchmarks of different languages and compilers: http://togototo.wordpress.com/2013/07/23/benchmarking-level-generation-go-rust-haskell-and-d/ http://togototo.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/benchmarks-round-two-parallel-go-rust-d-scala-and-nimrod/ I think it's answer for your question. For example, Clang (LLVM C) is fastest, LDC (LLVM D) has 2-nd place, but LLVM-GHC (LLVM Haskell) ~ 2 times slower. They also show non-llvm compilers like DMD in that chart, for comparison. I wonder where would C# stand if it's added to the list. I wouldn't like it if it performs any better than LDC though! ;-)
Re: LDC 0.12.0 has been released
On Wednesday, 23 October 2013 at 17:45:50 UTC, John Joyus wrote: On 10/22/2013 06:42 PM, David Nadlinger wrote: LDC 0.12.0, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download! Congratulations! I am a D enthusiast who reads more *about* D than actually learning the language! ;) I have a question about LLVM. When it comes to performance, do all LLVM-based languages eventually match each other in speed for any given task, no matter it is Clang or D? I guess having or not having a GC (or different implementations of it in different languages) will make a difference, but if we exclude GC, will they be generating the same exact code for any given operation? In other words, though two different languages are based on LLVM, can one of its binary exceed the other in speed? Thanks. It depends. Two benchmarks of different languages and compilers: http://togototo.wordpress.com/2013/07/23/benchmarking-level-generation-go-rust-haskell-and-d/ http://togototo.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/benchmarks-round-two-parallel-go-rust-d-scala-and-nimrod/ I think it's answer for your question. For example, Clang (LLVM C) is fastest, LDC (LLVM D) has 2-nd place, but LLVM-GHC (LLVM Haskell) ~ 2 times slower.
Re: LDC 0.12.0 has been released
On 2013-10-23 00:42, David Nadlinger wrote: LDC 0.12.0, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download! It is built on the 2.063.2 frontend and standard library and supports LLVM 3.1-3.3 (OS X: 3.2 only). I noticed that Apple's releases of Clang is still at 3.2. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: LDC 0.12.0 has been released
On Friday, 25 October 2013 at 07:50:36 UTC, ilya-stromberg wrote: I think it's answer for your question. For example, Clang (LLVM C) is fastest, LDC (LLVM D) has 2-nd place, but LLVM-GHC (LLVM Haskell) ~ 2 times slower. The explanation is quite simple. LLVM understand C and C++ runtime. It doesn't understand D runtime (LDC is doing some work in that regard, but it is still limited). So you see a difference between C and C++ as some optimization will be done in C/C++ (for instance heap to stack promotion) when it won't be done in D. Haskell has really different semantic than C and C++, and quite far away from the hardware, so you have to expect a performance drop. The comparison of either C or C++ with haskell is not really meaningful as it is really comparing apple and bananas.
Re: LDC 0.12.0 has been released
On 10/25/2013 03:50 AM, ilya-stromberg wrote: It depends. Two benchmarks of different languages and compilers: http://togototo.wordpress.com/2013/07/23/benchmarking-level-generation-go-rust-haskell-and-d/ http://togototo.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/benchmarks-round-two-parallel-go-rust-d-scala-and-nimrod/ I think it's answer for your question. For example, Clang (LLVM C) is fastest, LDC (LLVM D) has 2-nd place, but LLVM-GHC (LLVM Haskell) ~ 2 times slower. Yes, that answers my question. Thanks for those great links! It's impressive the LDC is as fast as Clang!!
Re: LDC 0.12.0 has been released
On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 00:42:13 +0200, David Nadlinger wrote: LDC 0.12.0, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download! It is built on the 2.063.2 frontend and standard library and supports LLVM 3.1-3.3 (OS X: 3.2 only). As usual, you can find links to the changelog and the binary packages over at digitalmars.D.ldc: http://forum.dlang.org/post/mailman.2418.1382481165.1719.digitalmars-d- l...@puremagic.com Also, while it is not yet clear when the final DMD 2.064 release will come out, work on integrating it into LDC has already begun, so stay tuned for the next release. Cheers, David Congratulations! :-)
Re: LDC 0.12.0 has been released
Arch Linux package updated.
Re: LDC 0.12.0 has been released
On Wednesday, 23 October 2013 at 12:17:56 UTC, Dicebot wrote: Arch Linux package updated. Awesome, that was quick! Thanks, David
Re: LDC 0.12.0 has been released
On 10/22/2013 06:42 PM, David Nadlinger wrote: LDC 0.12.0, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download! Congratulations! I am a D enthusiast who reads more *about* D than actually learning the language! ;) I have a question about LLVM. When it comes to performance, do all LLVM-based languages eventually match each other in speed for any given task, no matter it is Clang or D? I guess having or not having a GC (or different implementations of it in different languages) will make a difference, but if we exclude GC, will they be generating the same exact code for any given operation? In other words, though two different languages are based on LLVM, can one of its binary exceed the other in speed? Thanks.
Re: LDC 0.12.0 has been released
On Wednesday, 23 October 2013 at 17:45:50 UTC, John Joyus wrote: On 10/22/2013 06:42 PM, David Nadlinger wrote: LDC 0.12.0, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download! Congratulations! I am a D enthusiast who reads more *about* D than actually learning the language! ;) I have a question about LLVM. When it comes to performance, do all LLVM-based languages eventually match each other in speed for any given task, no matter it is Clang or D? I guess having or not having a GC (or different implementations of it in different languages) will make a difference, but if we exclude GC, will they be generating the same exact code for any given operation? It depends. If 2 language frontends generate the same IR then LLVM generates the same exact code. But in general you have different languages features therefore the IR differs, too. (C++ classes are not available in C, C++ multiple inheritance in not available in D, D slices are not available in C++, ...) If the generated IR is too stupid then even the LLVM optimizer can't help (e.g. look at the now solved issue #119 https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/issues/119). And a functional language like Haskell is likely to generate totally different IR. In other words, though two different languages are based on LLVM, can one of its binary exceed the other in speed? Yes. Thanks. Regards Kai
Re: LDC 0.12.0 has been released
On Tuesday, 22 October 2013 at 22:42:14 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote: LDC 0.12.0, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download! It is built on the 2.063.2 frontend and standard library and supports LLVM 3.1-3.3 (OS X: 3.2 only). Congratulations David and team :-)
Re: LDC 0.12.0 has been released
On 10/23/2013 02:26 PM, Kai Nacke wrote: On Wednesday, 23 October 2013 at 17:45:50 UTC, John Joyus wrote: On 10/22/2013 06:42 PM, David Nadlinger wrote: LDC 0.12.0, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download! Congratulations! I am a D enthusiast who reads more *about* D than actually learning the language! ;) I have a question about LLVM. When it comes to performance, do all LLVM-based languages eventually match each other in speed for any given task, no matter it is Clang or D? I guess having or not having a GC (or different implementations of it in different languages) will make a difference, but if we exclude GC, will they be generating the same exact code for any given operation? It depends. If 2 language frontends generate the same IR then LLVM generates the same exact code. But in general you have different languages features therefore the IR differs, too. (C++ classes are not available in C, C++ multiple inheritance in not available in D, D slices are not available in C++, ...) If the generated IR is too stupid then even the LLVM optimizer can't help (e.g. look at the now solved issue #119 https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/issues/119). And a functional language like Haskell is likely to generate totally different IR. In other words, though two different languages are based on LLVM, can one of its binary exceed the other in speed? Yes. Thanks Kai, It's good to know that smart developers can develop better compilers with the same IR available to all.
Re: LDC 0.12.0 has been released
On Tuesday, 22 October 2013 at 22:42:14 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote: LDC 0.12.0, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download! It is built on the 2.063.2 frontend and standard library and supports LLVM 3.1-3.3 (OS X: 3.2 only). As usual, you can find links to the changelog and the binary packages over at digitalmars.D.ldc: http://forum.dlang.org/post/mailman.2418.1382481165.1719.digitalmars-d-...@puremagic.com Also, while it is not yet clear when the final DMD 2.064 release will come out, work on integrating it into LDC has already begun, so stay tuned for the next release. Cheers, David Awesome !
