Re: dmd codegen improvements

Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On 5 Sep 2015 11:25 pm, "Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d" < > digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote: >> >> On 9/5/2015 5:54 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: >>> >>> On Saturday, 5 September 2015 at 08:15:06 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Wednesday, 16 September 2015 at 20:44:00 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 9/16/2015 7:16 AM, Bruno Medeiros wrote: On 28/08/2015 22:59, Walter Bright wrote: People told me I couldn't write a C compiler, then told me I couldn't write a C++ compiler. I'm still the only person who has ever

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Wednesday, 16 September 2015 at 14:40:26 UTC, Bruno Medeiros wrote: And on this aspect I think the development of D does very poorly. Often people clamored for a feature or change (whether people in the D community, or the C++ one), and Walter you went ahead and did it, regardless of

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 17/09/2015 08:10, Joakim wrote: Yeah, I was a bit stunned that that is what Bruno took from your post. I don't think anybody would question that writing a C or C++ compiler in the '80s and '90s had value, and I'm sure you did pretty well off them, considering you retired at 42

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 17/09/2015 09:06, Mike Parker wrote: On Wednesday, 16 September 2015 at 14:40:26 UTC, Bruno Medeiros wrote: And on this aspect I think the development of D does very poorly. Often people clamored for a feature or change (whether people in the D community, or the C++ one), and Walter you went

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 17/09/2015 12:57, Bruno Medeiros wrote: But if people from the C++ community said it, OMG, then Walter goes "let's add it to D!", just to prove a point or something. *Mind you*: all this I'm saying is pre TDPL book stuff. After the book was out, things stabilized. But way back, even more so

Re: dmd codegen improvements

Template metaprogramming is probably the only notable feature borrowed from C++ (more like a redesign?), the rest looks more like borrowed from Java. This actually turns C++ programmers away when they see so many things are done differently from C++.

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 17 September 2015 at 11:57:29 UTC, Bruno Medeiros wrote: *Mind you*: all this I'm saying is pre TDPL book stuff. After the book was out, things stabilized. Can I speak for the people who only became familiar with D after TDPL and say I don't really care about what you're

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 17 September 2015 at 11:47:36 UTC, Bruno Medeiros wrote: On 17/09/2015 08:10, Joakim wrote: Yeah, I was a bit stunned that that is what Bruno took from your post. I don't think anybody would question that writing a C or C++ compiler in the '80s and '90s had value, and I'm sure you

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 28/08/2015 22:59, Walter Bright wrote: People told me I couldn't write a C compiler, then told me I couldn't write a C++ compiler. I'm still the only person who has ever implemented a complete C++ compiler (C++98). Then they all (100%) laughed at me for starting D, saying nobody would ever

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 02/09/2015 19:58, Walter Bright wrote: On 8/29/2015 12:37 PM, Laeeth Isharc wrote: In my experience you can deliver everything people say they want, and then find it isn't that at all. That's so true. My favorite anecdote on that was back in the 1990's. A friend of mine said that what he

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Wednesday, 16 September 2015 at 14:40:26 UTC, Bruno Medeiros wrote: Me and other people from D community: "ok... now we have a new half-baked functionality in D, adding complexity for little value, and put here only to please people that are extremely unlikely to ever be using D whatever

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 9/16/2015 7:16 AM, Bruno Medeiros wrote: On 28/08/2015 22:59, Walter Bright wrote: People told me I couldn't write a C compiler, then told me I couldn't write a C++ compiler. I'm still the only person who has ever implemented a complete C++ compiler (C++98). Then they all (100%) laughed at

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Tuesday, 18 August 2015 at 10:45:49 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: Martin ran some benchmarks recently that showed that ddmd compiled with dmd was about 30% slower than when compiled with gdc/ldc. This seems to be fairly typical. I'm interested in ways to reduce that gap. There are 3 broad

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Sunday, 13 September 2015 at 17:30:12 UTC, BBasile wrote: It seems that since the Pentium I, ENTER is always slower. But i don't know if it's used as a kind of optimization for the binary size. Actually before using DMD I had **never** seen an ENTER. Same here, I thought nobody used

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 09/13/2015 07:30 PM, BBasile wrote: > It seems that since the Pentium I, ENTER is always slower. But i don't > know if it's used as a kind of optimization for the binary size. > Actually before using DMD I had **never** seen an ENTER. https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/5073

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Sunday, 13 September 2015 at 18:33:52 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: On 09/13/2015 07:30 PM, BBasile wrote: It seems that since the Pentium I, ENTER is always slower. But i don't know if it's used as a kind of optimization for the binary size. Actually before using DMD I had **never** seen an

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 09/13/2015 08:45 PM, BBasile wrote: > Yeah, that was fast. With the hope it'll be approved. If only it wasn't for me to do this...

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 9/6/2015 4:39 PM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote: It didn't happen for me because I changed my gmail settings after Walter requested some time back to only include plain text. My NG experience is much less enjoyable as a result of the change; I prefer the blue quote line, but now I just have a

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 2015-09-06 15:24, Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= wrote: Oh, actually it appears to run on both OS-X and Linux. I didn't know that. Looks very promising, thanks! Yeah, it's built on the same framework as Atom. Or were you hoping for Visual

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Monday, 7 September 2015 at 13:41:31 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2015-09-06 15:24, Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= wrote: Oh, actually it appears to run on both OS-X and Linux. I didn't know that. Looks very promising, thanks! Yeah, it's

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 6 September 2015 at 18:57, Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On 2015-09-06 02:54, Walter Bright wrote: > >> It probably is a rampant problem. I notice it with you because >> Thunderbird gives a line count for a message, and yours are usually in >> the

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 5 Sep 2015 11:25 pm, "Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d" < digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote: > > On 9/5/2015 5:54 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: >> >> On Saturday, 5 September 2015 at 08:15:06 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: >>> >>> And your post did it too. >>> >>> If you're using the Thunderbird news

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 2015-09-06 02:54, Walter Bright wrote: It probably is a rampant problem. I notice it with you because Thunderbird gives a line count for a message, and yours are usually in the hundreds of lines while others are like 10 to 20. Usually Thunderbird highlights the quoted part in blue and

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Sunday, 6 September 2015 at 12:31:27 UTC, Kagamin wrote: On Saturday, 5 September 2015 at 14:57:58 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:44:46 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: I heard the TypeScript support for Visual Studio Code is really good. I'm crossing my

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Saturday, 5 September 2015 at 14:57:58 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:44:46 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: I heard the TypeScript support for Visual Studio Code is really good. I'm crossing my fingers for an OS-X or Linux version of VS. ;) You mean Visual

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 15:45:35 UTC, Luís Marques wrote: On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:59:12 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: Actually, browsers are deprecating NPAPI plugins. Flash is so dead… Could, in principle, Flash be supported through an extension, instead of a media /

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 5 Sep 2015 6:31 am, "Manu via Digitalmars-d" wrote: > > On 5 September 2015 at 14:14, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d > wrote: > > On 9/4/2015 7:52 AM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote: > >> > >> [...] > > > > > > Sadly, your newsgroup

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 9/5/2015 1:00 AM, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d wrote: On 5 Sep 2015 6:31 am, "Manu via Digitalmars-d" > wrote: > > On 5 September 2015 at 14:14, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d >

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 18-Aug-2015 13:45, Walter Bright wrote: Martin ran some benchmarks recently that showed that ddmd compiled with dmd was about 30% slower than when compiled with gdc/ldc. This seems to be fairly typical. I'm interested in ways to reduce that gap. .. 2. instruction selection patterns like

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 9/5/2015 5:54 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: On Saturday, 5 September 2015 at 08:15:06 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: And your post did it too. If you're using the Thunderbird news reader, typing Cntl-U will show the full source of the message. This is perfectly normal for emails and such. They are

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:25:11 UTC, rsw0x wrote: I believe the FOSS version of Intellij can install the Javascript plugin which also adds support for Typescript. May be wrong. Hm. I bought WebStorm to do Dart, but have kinda put Dart on hold, so maybe not a bad idea. I assume it

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Saturday, 5 September 2015 at 08:15:06 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: And your post did it too. If you're using the Thunderbird news reader, typing Cntl-U will show the full source of the message. This is perfectly normal for emails and such. They are multipart/alternative MIME messages which

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 9/5/2015 4:32 PM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote: Perhaps the NG server should make an effort to trim the wanted message content then? I'd rather work with NNTP as it is. I'm still astonished I'm the only one that uses Gmail... this should be a rampant problem. It probably is a rampant

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 6 September 2015 at 07:20, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On 9/5/2015 5:54 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: >> >> On Saturday, 5 September 2015 at 08:15:06 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: >>> >>> And your post did it too. >>> >>> If you're using the Thunderbird news

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 13:39:45 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 07:52:30 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: I have no problem recommending TypeScript with WebStorm (or some other editor) for business like applications. Err... avoid WebStorm. Just noticed

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 2015-09-04 15:39, Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= wrote: Err... avoid WebStorm. Just noticed JetBrains have decided to rip off their customers with a subscription model and increase their pricing 100%. Damn, I'm going back to OpenSource IDEs… I

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 22:53:01 UTC, deadalnix wrote: On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 21:08:51 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote: On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 10:04:58 UTC, deadalnix wrote: On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 09:56:55 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Thursday, 3

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:26:49 UTC, rsw0x wrote: Maybe we'll be lucky and Firefox will fade into obscurity with the way they've been handling things lately. No. TurboFan is in Chrome with asm.js support.

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 07:52:30 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: I have no problem recommending TypeScript with WebStorm (or some other editor) for business like applications. Err... avoid WebStorm. Just noticed JetBrains have decided to rip off their customers with a subscription

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:34:52 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:26:49 UTC, rsw0x wrote: Maybe we'll be lucky and Firefox will fade into obscurity with the way they've been handling things lately. No. TurboFan is in Chrome with asm.js support. I'd

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 5 Sep 2015 12:32 am, "rsw0x via Digitalmars-d" < digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote: > > On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 22:53:01 UTC, deadalnix wrote: >> >> On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 21:08:51 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote: >>> >>> On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 10:04:58 UTC,

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:40:32 UTC, rsw0x wrote: On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:34:52 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:26:49 UTC, rsw0x wrote: Maybe we'll be lucky and Firefox will fade into obscurity with the way they've been handling things

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 01:54:45 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote: On Tuesday, 1 September 2015 at 17:14:44 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: It's been mentioned before that there really isn't much point in using C when you can use D. Even if you completely avoid the GC and the standard library,

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:53:06 UTC, Manu wrote: On 5 Sep 2015 12:32 am, "rsw0x via Digitalmars-d" < digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote: [...] wrote: [...] Performance is a different issue since it does not provide SIMD yet. [...] run about 20% slower typically. [...] In fact a

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 09/02/2015 11:57 PM, Walter Bright wrote: On 9/2/2015 7:48 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: but still i'm meh on the practical usefulness of such things. I guess if you target a canvas and run your code in it that makes more sense but my preferred style is a progressive enhancement webpage where you

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:45:39 UTC, rsw0x wrote: Because it has the path of least resistance. It's still a poor technology that is just treating the symptoms. pnacl/pepper is not good either, they are both poor technologies. But vendors are moving in the same direction, which is

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:59:12 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: Actually, browsers are deprecating NPAPI plugins. Flash is so dead… Could, in principle, Flash be supported through an extension, instead of a media / NPAPI plugin?

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 09/03/2015 02:54 AM, Walter Bright wrote: On 9/2/2015 9:09 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote: As Walter once said, "Be the change you wish to see." I think that was Andrei. But I do agree with it. I think it was Gandhi :o). -- Andrei

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:43:43 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:40:32 UTC, rsw0x wrote: On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:34:52 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:26:49 UTC, rsw0x wrote: Maybe we'll be lucky and Firefox

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:43:43 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:40:32 UTC, rsw0x wrote: On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:34:52 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:26:49 UTC, rsw0x wrote: Maybe we'll be lucky and Firefox

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:22:17 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 01:54:45 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote: On Tuesday, 1 September 2015 at 17:14:44 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: One of the first projects I used D for was back in college a number of years ago where

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 17:05:41 UTC, deadalnix wrote: Statement do not makes arguements. pNaCl is portable, take only a 20% hit compared to pure native and is compact to send through the wire. You think pnacl is compact and compresses well? That's an unusual position. Both asm.js and

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 04:30:04 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote: "I don't have enough time to figure out all the ins-and-outs of the current compiler." "Unless you sell DMD, how about providing a definition of "customer"? If you don't pay attention to evaluations, then surely the

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:56:48 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:45:39 UTC, rsw0x wrote: Because it has the path of least resistance. It's still a poor technology that is just treating the symptoms. pnacl/pepper is not good either, they are both poor

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 18:27:14 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote: Sometimes it's really worth putting energy into ensuring crisp definitions. This isn't one of those cases. Your own language is exploiting polysemy in an unstraightforward manner - mixing up different meanings to achieve a

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 5 September 2015 at 14:14, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On 9/4/2015 7:52 AM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote: >> >> [...] > > > Sadly, your newsgroup software is back to doing double posts - once in > plaintext, once in html. My software in this case was

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 9/4/2015 7:52 AM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote: [...] Sadly, your newsgroup software is back to doing double posts - once in plaintext, once in html.

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:53:06 UTC, Manu wrote: What I don't get is, Firefox and ie support plugins... Why isn't there a pnacl plugin for other browsers? Surely it could be added with the existing plugin interfaces? Actually, browsers are deprecating NPAPI plugins. Flash is so dead…

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 15:45:35 UTC, Luís Marques wrote: On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:59:12 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: Actually, browsers are deprecating NPAPI plugins. Flash is so dead… Could, in principle, Flash be supported through an extension, instead of a media /

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:26:49 UTC, rsw0x wrote: All of this could have been avoided by all browser vendors agreeing to implement pNaCl. Maybe we'll be lucky and Firefox will fade into obscurity with the way they've been handling things lately. I thought even the PNaCl people were

Re: dmd codegen improvements

Actually, in the point cloud on the web demo I've linked before, which is EXTREMELY compute intensive code, we experience a barely measurable loss in performance between pnacl and native code. 20% loss would be huge, but we see nothing like that, probably within 5% is closer to our experience. On

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 2015-09-03 23:01, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote: If you don't change the prototype object, then it is mostly similar, but more flexible. Functions are constructors and prototype objects are class definitions. Looking how many languages compile to JS and how many JS libraries there are out

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 07:44:23 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: Looking how many languages compile to JS and how many JS libraries there are out there that try to invent some kind of new syntax for declaring classes and now E6, I would say a lot of people are not satisfied with the current

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 2015-09-03 15:09, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: what about Borland's compiler? That would be Taumetric in Walter's list [1][2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borland_C%2B%2B [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo_C%2B%2B -- /Jacob Carlborg

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 9/3/2015 3:27 AM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote: Our major active project at work also now depends on Emscripten and PNaCl; 2 exotic LDC targets which would get my office onto D quicksmart! ping Adam Ruppe? I've never suffered C++ so violently. I feel your pain!

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 9/3/2015 1:31 AM, deadalnix wrote: On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 06:54:05 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 9/2/2015 9:09 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote: As Walter once said, "Be the change you wish to see." I think that was Andrei. But I do agree with it. It's Gandhi. Ah, makes

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 9/3/2015 7:30 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2015-09-03 15:09, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: what about Borland's compiler? That would be Taumetric in Walter's list [1][2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borland_C%2B%2B [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo_C%2B%2B Apple had licensed

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 9/3/2015 2:37 PM, David Nadlinger wrote: On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 18:14:45 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: I sometimes wonder what influence it had on clang. In terms of design, not more than any other C++ compiler would have as far as I can tell. Might be interesting for you to have a

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 07:04:11 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 9/2/2015 9:55 PM, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote: Most C++ compilers are dead. Actually, only a tiny handful of original C++ compilers were ever created. The rest are just evolved versions of them. To list them (from

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 18:14:45 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: I sometimes wonder what influence it had on clang. In terms of design, not more than any other C++ compiler would have as far as I can tell. Might be interesting for you to have a closer look at it at some point though for

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 13:12:07 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 06:45:16 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: There's a lot of stuff other languages can do that JS can't. For example, classes, which a lot of developers prefer to use in favor of the weird object

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 10:04:58 UTC, deadalnix wrote: On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 09:56:55 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 06:18:54 UTC, deadalnix wrote: It is twice as slow as native. That's far from allowing generation of pure assembly. It is

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 04:30:04 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote: On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 03:57:39 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 9/2/2015 7:48 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: but still i'm meh on the practical usefulness of such things. I guess if you target a canvas and run your code

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 9/2/2015 9:28 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote: Yes, serve existing customers well, and they will spread the word for you, leading to more customers. Divert your energy to please non-customers in hopes of winning them over, and you may end up driving away what customers you do have.

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 3 Sep 2015 8:20 am, "deadalnix via Digitalmars-d" < digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote: > > On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 04:30:04 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote: >> >> On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 03:57:39 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: >>> >>> On 9/2/2015 7:48 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 9/2/2015 9:09 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote: As Walter once said, "Be the change you wish to see." I think that was Andrei. But I do agree with it.

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 9/2/2015 9:55 PM, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote: Most C++ compilers are dead. Actually, only a tiny handful of original C++ compilers were ever created. The rest are just evolved versions of them. To list them (from memory): Cfront (Bjarne Stroustrup) Zortech C++ (Me) G++ (Michael Tiemann)

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 06:54:05 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 9/2/2015 9:09 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote: As Walter once said, "Be the change you wish to see." I think that was Andrei. But I do agree with it. It's Gandhi.

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 2015-09-03 05:57, Walter Bright wrote: I don't see a whole lot of point to generating JS from another language. You can't do anything more than JS can do, and you're likely to be doing less. There's a lot of stuff other languages can do that JS can't. For example, classes, which a lot of

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 09:56:55 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 06:18:54 UTC, deadalnix wrote: It is twice as slow as native. That's far from allowing generation of pure assembly. It is translatable to pure assembly, addressing is modulo heap size.

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 06:18:54 UTC, deadalnix wrote: It is twice as slow as native. That's far from allowing generation of pure assembly. It is translatable to pure assembly, addressing is modulo heap size. Performance is a different issue since it does not provide SIMD yet.

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 3 September 2015 at 13:57, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On 9/2/2015 7:48 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: >> >> but still i'm meh on the practical usefulness of such things. I guess if >> you >> target a canvas and run your code in it that makes more sense but

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 9/3/2015 2:28 PM, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote: I expected the list to be longer. I don't. It takes 10 years to write a C++ compiler, and most companies wanting to get into the business found it far more practical to buy one as a starting point. Which one represents the non-cfront SGI

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 21:01:10 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote: On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 13:12:07 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 06:45:16 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: There's a lot of stuff other languages can do that JS can't. For example, classes,

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 21:08:51 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote: On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 10:04:58 UTC, deadalnix wrote: On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 09:56:55 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 06:18:54 UTC, deadalnix wrote: It is twice as

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 22:48:47 UTC, deadalnix wrote: On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 21:01:10 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote: Huh? Dynamic languages have dynamic lookup, how is that different from virtual functions? Maybe because you need 2 map lookups + 1 indirection instead of

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 22:53:01 UTC, deadalnix wrote: asm.js typically runs half the speed of natively compiled code. pNaCl run about 20% slower typically. Browser version, benchmark, reference? Without informationloss there is no inherent overhead outside sandboxing if you avoid

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 21:01:10 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote: Huh? Dynamic languages have dynamic lookup, how is that different from virtual functions? The specific implementation I used was like what D compiles to: index into an array. So it is a bit clunky to do

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 06:56:16 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 9/2/2015 9:28 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote: Yes, serve existing customers well, and they will spread the word for you, leading to more customers. Divert your energy to please non-customers in hopes of winning them

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 21:58:18 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: Yeah, I'd have to read through the source code. But it's still copyrighted, and I prefer not to be subject to taint. For years, many people did not believe I could have created a C++ compiler on my own, and they were quick to

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 07:04:11 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: Actually, only a tiny handful of original C++ compilers were ever created. The rest are just evolved versions of them. what about Borland's compiler?

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 06:45:16 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: There's a lot of stuff other languages can do that JS can't. For example, classes, which a lot of developers prefer to use in favor of the weird object system in JS. You can kinda do classes in JS, it just isn't pretty

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 03-Sep-2015 16:09, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 07:04:11 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: Actually, only a tiny handful of original C++ compilers were ever created. The rest are just evolved versions of them. what about Borland's compiler? Seconded, it was horrible but

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On 8/29/2015 1:13 PM, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote: But the net effect of maintaining 3 different backends is sending signals that the project lacks direction and priorities. Back when there was only 1 compiler, people complained about that, saying it signaled lack of reliable support. Having

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Tuesday, 1 September 2015 at 17:14:44 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: It's been mentioned before that there really isn't much point in using C when you can use D. Even if you completely avoid the GC and the standard library, you're _still_ ahead of where you'd be with C, and you can call C

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Wednesday, 2 September 2015 at 20:50:03 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Wednesday, 2 September 2015 at 19:05:32 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 8/29/2015 9:16 PM, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote: Here is a good list: [...] 5. Performance. Ironically, you guys complained in this thread when that

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thu, Sep 03, 2015 at 02:30:39AM +, Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On Sunday, 30 August 2015 at 16:17:49 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: > >On Sunday, 30 August 2015 at 06:07:25 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote: > >>Morale is important in long term projects that don't pay off very >

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 09:09:43PM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On 9/2/2015 7:08 PM, Laeeth Isharc wrote: > >And that's why it really doesn't matter what the naysayers believe - > >the ones you want to focus on pleasing are those who are favourably > >disposed towards D anyway

Re: dmd codegen improvements

On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 02:30:41 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote: In my experience grumbling without action doesn't tend to lead to the change you want in the world. In theory maybe it should, and someone will listen. But human beings are funny creatures. End user back pressure helps. If

  1   2   3   4   >