As per KallistiOS Dreamcast maintainers, the new GCC version has
been integrated, with support for all GCC frontends,
https://twitter.com/falco_girgis/status/1788064911689404612
On Saturday, 19 August 2023 at 19:23:38 UTC, Cecil Ward wrote:
I’m trying to write a cross-platform function that gives access
to the CPU’s prefetch instructions such as x86
prefetch0/1/2/prefetchnta and AAarch64 too. I’ve found that the
GDC and LDC compilers provide builtin magic functions
On Saturday, 19 August 2023 at 19:23:38 UTC, Cecil Ward wrote:
I’m trying to write a cross-platform function that gives access
to the CPU’s prefetch instructions such as x86
prefetch0/1/2/prefetchnta and AAarch64 too. I’ve found that the
GDC and LDC compilers provide builtin magic functions
I’m trying to write a cross-platform function that gives access
to the CPU’s prefetch instructions such as x86
prefetch0/1/2/prefetchnta and AAarch64 too. I’ve found that the
GDC and LDC compilers provide builtin magic functions for this,
and are what I need. I am trying to put together
and curl)
are all Boost regardless of compiler.
That just leaves backends, which depends upon GCC and LLVM. So
if you can use GCC and Clang, your fine to use GDC and LDC.
As far as I know any contribution to GCC has to be done under a
GPLv3 compatible license (like Boost) and then it's all
n by many users (e.g. compiling with
-release, disabling of asserts or array bounds checking, etc).
Known edge cases of compiler optimization causing different
behavior between vendors?
Some LDC stuff:
https://wiki.dlang.org/LDC-specific_language_changes#Violations_of_the_specification
Pretty muc
On Monday, 24 July 2023 at 09:20:05 UTC, BoQsc wrote:
There are three compilers present in the Dlang website: DMD GDC
and LDC
DMD can build much faster than LDC. In some cases it is quite
extreme, for example the product I work on has a 3.6x faster
debug build time with DMD (well, only
it into LDC.
I understand what you mean, but a key reason to use LDC or GDC is
for all the features that DMD does not have.
- support for more platforms
- CPU intrinsics, more extensive inline assembly
- sanitizers, fuzzing
- special function/variable attributes (e.g. @section, @weak, ...)
To the OP's
On Monday, 24 July 2023 at 13:30:27 UTC, cc wrote:
Is there any list of known significant "gotchas" with moving to
LDC from DMD? Any unexpected surprises to watch out for or be
careful for?
- DMD has weak linking for all functions by default (mostly as a
workaround to several bugs). In LDC,
, which depends upon GCC and LLVM. So if you
can use GCC and Clang, your fine to use GDC and LDC.
only differ between
them by their glue code to the relevant backend and some modules in
druntime that are optional. Oh and inline assembly, although there is
some compat code in ldc/gdc for dmd style.
If dmd dies, so does ldc/gdc basically. Each one sees active
development although gdc only has
``extern(Objective-C)`` implemented
currently. I don't know about GDC.
Over all, if you are familiar with GCC & Clang, you'll be ok. A lot of
the flags from dmd have a comparable version (if not split up further)
in LDC and GDC.
by their glue code to the relevant backend and
some modules in druntime that are optional. Oh and inline
assembly, although there is some compat code in ldc/gdc for dmd
style.
If dmd dies, so does ldc/gdc basically. Each one sees active
development although gdc only has one developer. Ldc keeps up
I could be interesting to also compare the licenses of the 3
compilers.
that are optional. Oh and inline assembly, although there is
some compat code in ldc/gdc for dmd style.
If dmd dies, so does ldc/gdc basically. Each one sees active development
although gdc only has one developer. Ldc keeps up with the dmd releases
pretty well.
There are three compilers present in the Dlang website: DMD GDC
and LDC
On Tuesday, 11 July 2023 at 05:49:36 UTC, Sergey wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 July 2023 at 04:11:38 UTC, Cecil Ward wrote:
I’m trying to install GDC on a new Linux box and I don’t know
what I’m doing. Background: I have installed LDC successfully
and have installed GDC on a Raspberry Pi using 32-bit
On Tuesday, 11 July 2023 at 04:11:38 UTC, Cecil Ward wrote:
I’m trying to install GDC on a new Linux box and I don’t know
what I’m doing. Background: I have installed LDC successfully
and have installed GDC on a Raspberry Pi using 32-bit ARM.
For some reason the apt-get command doesn’t work
On Tuesday, 11 July 2023 at 04:11:38 UTC, Cecil Ward wrote:
I’m trying to install GDC on a new Linux box and I don’t know
what I’m doing. Background: I have installed LDC successfully
and have installed GDC on a Raspberry Pi using 32-bit ARM.
For some reason the apt-get command doesn’t work
I’m trying to install GDC on a new Linux box and I don’t know
what I’m doing. Background: I have installed LDC successfully and
have installed GDC on a Raspberry Pi using 32-bit ARM.
For some reason the apt-get command doesn’t work on this machine,
don’t know why. The machine is a virtual
On Thursday, 6 July 2023 at 22:44:27 UTC, Alexibu wrote:
I just encountered this problem in recently released debian
bookworm (gdc 12.2.0), I was able to fix these undefined
lambdas inside std library with -fall-instantiations, and a
bunch of other undefined lambdas in my own code
On Saturday, 28 May 2022 at 14:44:56 UTC, Adam D Ruppe wrote:
On Saturday, 28 May 2022 at 14:16:51 UTC, kdevel wrote:
$ gdc -o ppinsta ppinsta.d parser.d
Compiling together is faster anyway this is prolly what you
want most the time.
But I know what's going on now, it is the template
On Friday, 16 June 2023 at 06:38:17 UTC, Murloc wrote:
Thanks! That works well. I thought that `module pack.file1` is
implicitly there by default :')
The compiler will use the file name as a default module name if
you don't provide one, but that's *just* the module name. It
doesn't take
On Friday, 16 June 2023 at 06:32:21 UTC, Richard (Rikki) Andrew
Cattermole wrote:
On 16/06/2023 6:26 PM, Murloc wrote:
Don't you need to provide a full path to these files
relatively to the directory where the compilation process
takes place (Test)?
Yes.
But I suspect you have not written
On 16/06/2023 6:26 PM, Murloc wrote:
Don't you need to provide a full path to these files relatively to the
directory where the compilation process takes place (Test)?
Yes.
But I suspect you have not written the module statement, which is required.
```d
module pack.file1;
// file1.d
void
;
import pack.file2: value;
writeln(value);
}
```
```d
// program.d
void main() {
import pack.file1;
printlnValueInFile2(); // -120 expected
}
```
From the directory Test when I'm trying to compile the project
with command
`gdc -o program program.d pack/file1.d pack/file2.d`, it produces
’. :-)
The idea would be that the user could run this to sanity-check
her understanding of the sometimes arcane GDC asm code
outputs/inputs/clobbers syntax, and see what her asm code’s
constraints are actually going to do rather than what she
thinks it’s going to do. Clearly I can’t readily start
-check
her understanding of the sometimes arcane GDC asm code
outputs/inputs/clobbers syntax, and see what her asm code’s
constraints are actually going to do rather than what she thinks
it’s going to do. Clearly I can’t readily start parsing the asm
body itself, I would just inspect the meta info
I found what was the issue!! https://stackoverflow.com/a/63856113
The 0x55XX address you got is most likely the memory
address of the function after the EXE is loaded from disk.
addr2line only recognizes VMA addresses like the ones that you
got from disassembling with objdump.
It
I found what was the issue!! https://stackoverflow.com/a/63856113
The 0x55XX address you got is most likely the memory
address of the function after the EXE is loaded from disk.
addr2line only recognizes VMA addresses like the ones that you
got from disassembling with objdump.
It
On Friday, 17 March 2023 at 20:53:07 UTC, WB wrote:
On Thursday, 16 March 2023 at 22:07:04 UTC, ryuukk_ wrote:
Hello,
The problem is when i compile with DMD i get:
```
??:0
```
When i compile it with GDC i get proper file + line
What does GDC do different than DMD?
Is there a way to get
On Thursday, 16 March 2023 at 22:07:04 UTC, ryuukk_ wrote:
Hello,
The problem is when i compile with DMD i get:
```
??:0
```
When i compile it with GDC i get proper file + line
What does GDC do different than DMD?
Is there a way to get the same result as GDC with DMD?
Thanks
Did you
t;,
array[i], _exe[0]);
system([0]);
printf(" >%s\n", strings[i]);
//sprintf([0], "addr2line %p -f -e %s |
ddemangle", strings[i], _exe[0]);
//system([0]);
}
exit(-1);
}
```
The problem is when i compile with DMD i get:
```
??:0
```
When i compile it with GDC i get proper file + line
What does GDC do different than DMD?
Is there a way to get the same result as GDC with DMD?
Thanks
On Sunday, 15 January 2023 at 19:00:50 UTC, Johan wrote:
On Tuesday, 6 December 2022 at 12:13:59 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Hi,
There is now (long overdue) expanded documentation of the
user-facing features of GDC online on GCC's documentation site.
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gdc/
Just
On Tuesday, 6 December 2022 at 12:13:59 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Hi,
There is now (long overdue) expanded documentation of the
user-facing features of GDC online on GCC's documentation site.
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gdc/
Just now, I had trouble finding this. I don't think
On Thursday, 15 December 2022 at 21:43:07 UTC, TheZipCreator
wrote:
is there a compiled binary of GDC anywhere? I looked at
https://www.gdcproject.org/downloads, and the link there goes
to winlibs, but after downloading the archive I couldn't find
gdc anywhere in it. I did some research
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20841
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P3
--
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15843
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P3
--
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23416
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P3
--
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14937
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P4
--
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=21342
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P4
--
is there a compiled binary of GDC anywhere? I looked at
https://www.gdcproject.org/downloads, and the link there goes to
winlibs, but after downloading the archive I couldn't find gdc
anywhere in it. I did some research and [it appears they removed
it](https://forum.dlang.org/thread
On Tuesday, 6 December 2022 at 12:13:59 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Hi,
There is now (long overdue) expanded documentation of the
user-facing features of GDC online on GCC's documentation site.
[...]
Nice.
GDC expanded documentation looks really good, and covers
everything I could think
On Tuesday, 6 December 2022 at 12:13:59 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Hi,
There is now (long overdue) expanded documentation of the
user-facing features of GDC online on GCC's documentation site.
...
This is very much appreciated, especially the SIMD portion.
Thanks.
On Tuesday, 6 December 2022 at 12:13:59 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Hi,
There is now (long overdue) expanded documentation of the
user-facing features of GDC online on GCC's documentation site.
[...]
There is quite some momentum on the GDC front recently. Well
done. Much appreciated.
On Tuesday, 6 December 2022 at 12:13:59 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Hi,
There are new documents to learn.
On Tuesday, 6 December 2022 at 12:13:59 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Hi,
There is now (long overdue) expanded documentation of the
user-facing features of GDC online on GCC's documentation site.
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gdc/ (also in
[PDF](https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gdc.pdf
Hi,
There is now (long overdue) expanded documentation of the
user-facing features of GDC online on GCC's documentation site.
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gdc/ (also in
[PDF](https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gdc.pdf) or
[PostScript](https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gdc.ps.gz) or an
[HTML
: non-constant expression `& foo`
But this code should compile and pass:
$ gdc -O -funittest -fmain post2.d -o post2 && ./post2
void post2.S.foo()
void post2.S.bar()
1 modules passed unittests
--
||ibuc...@gdcproject.org
--- Comment #1 from Iain Buclaw ---
LDC also errors:
dmd-gdc-difference.d(4): Error: need `this` to access `foo`
Compiler returned: 1
--
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23416
Issue ID: 23416
Summary: Difference DMD/GDC: Error: non-constant expression `&
foo`
Product: D
Version: D2
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
Status:
On Saturday, 28 May 2022 at 22:23:34 UTC, kdevel wrote:
On Saturday, 28 May 2022 at 15:10:25 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
[...]
Is this specific to gdc, or does it happen for other compilers
as well?
The former.
Please check the dlang versions of all compilers. The template
emission
On Saturday, 28 May 2022 at 15:10:25 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
[...]
Is this specific to gdc, or does it happen for other compilers
as well?
The former.
On Saturday, 28 May 2022 at 14:37:07 UTC, kdevel wrote:
dmd:
```
$ dmd -c ppinsta.d
$ dmd -c parser.d
$ dmd -of=ppinsta ppinsta.o parser.o
$ ./ppinsta
[]
```
(checking ldc/ldmd2 later)
```
$ ldc2 -c ppinsta.d && ldc2 -c parser.d && ldc2 -of=ppinsta
ppinsta.o parser.o && ./ppinsta
[]
$
On 5/28/22 10:44 AM, Adam D Ruppe wrote:
On Saturday, 28 May 2022 at 14:16:51 UTC, kdevel wrote:
$ gdc -o ppinsta ppinsta.d parser.d
Compiling together is faster anyway this is prolly what you want most
the time.
But I know what's going on now, it is the template emission thing
On Saturday, 28 May 2022 at 14:44:56 UTC, Adam D Ruppe wrote:
On Saturday, 28 May 2022 at 14:16:51 UTC, kdevel wrote:
$ gdc -o ppinsta ppinsta.d parser.d
Compiling together is faster anyway this is prolly what you
want most the time.
But I know what's going on now, it is the template
On Saturday, 28 May 2022 at 14:16:51 UTC, kdevel wrote:
$ gdc -o ppinsta ppinsta.d parser.d
Compiling together is faster anyway this is prolly what you want
most the time.
But I know what's going on now, it is the template emission
thing, the compiler thinks, since it is from std
On Saturday, 28 May 2022 at 13:55:09 UTC, Tejas wrote:
On Saturday, 28 May 2022 at 13:12:46 UTC, kdevel wrote:
I am trying to build a project with GDC. It successfully
compiles with dmd and ldmd2. When I use gdc in one go the
binary is successfully build:
[...]
Is seperate compilation
On Saturday, 28 May 2022 at 14:03:13 UTC, Adam D Ruppe wrote:
On Saturday, 28 May 2022 at 13:12:46 UTC, kdevel wrote:
gdc -o ppinsta ppinsta.o esah.o evaluate.o jsr.o jsw.o
parser.o ptvr.o stack.o testdatagenerator.o
You might need to add -lgphobos or -lgphobos2 or whatever it is
called too
On Saturday, 28 May 2022 at 13:12:46 UTC, kdevel wrote:
Any ideas?
ppinsta.d
```
import std.stdio : write, writeln;
import parser; // <- comment this out and gdc links
void main ()
{
string [string] h;
writeln (h);
}
```
parser.d
```
module parser;
import std.regex : regex;
priv
On Saturday, 28 May 2022 at 13:12:46 UTC, kdevel wrote:
gdc -o ppinsta ppinsta.o esah.o evaluate.o jsr.o jsw.o parser.o
ptvr.o stack.o testdatagenerator.o
You might need to add -lgphobos or -lgphobos2 or whatever it is
called too explicitly.
On Saturday, 28 May 2022 at 13:12:46 UTC, kdevel wrote:
I am trying to build a project with GDC. It successfully
compiles with dmd and ldmd2. When I use gdc in one go the
binary is successfully build:
[...]
Is seperate compilation working successfully for dmd and ldc?
The only bug I know
I am trying to build a project with GDC. It successfully compiles
with dmd and ldmd2. When I use gdc in one go the binary is
successfully build:
```
$ gdc -o ppinsta esah.d evaluate.d jsr.d jsw.d parser.d ppinsta.d
ptvr.d stack.d testdatagenerator.d
```
Though after compiling separately
On 4/26/22 3:32 AM, Claude wrote:
> On Tuesday, 26 April 2022 at 10:29:39 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>> you haven't initialized the D run-time in your program.
> I should have suspected something like this.
I've just discovered[1] that I had a DConf 2020 presentation which is
somewhat related to
On Tuesday, 26 April 2022 at 13:36:19 UTC, Claude wrote:
On Tuesday, 26 April 2022 at 12:49:21 UTC, Alain De Vos wrote:
---
I also encountered problems while I was trying to use CTFE only
functions (using betterC so I don't have to link
phobos/D-runtime).
However, if those functions use the
On Tuesday, 26 April 2022 at 12:49:21 UTC, Alain De Vos wrote:
PS :
I use
```
ldc2 --gcc=cc ,
cc -v : clang version 11.0.1
```
We only have gcc in our toolchain (we target an ARM-based
embedded system).
---
I also encountered problems while I was trying to use CTFE only
functions (using
PS :
I use
```
ldc2 --gcc=cc ,
cc -v : clang version 11.0.1
```
On Tuesday, 26 April 2022 at 10:29:39 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On Tuesday, 26 April 2022 at 10:23:15 UTC, Claude wrote:
Hello,
Hello,
<%--SNIP--%>
Does anyone have any idea what's going on?
(if I just compile a single D file with "int main() { int* a =
new int(42); return *a; }", it
On Tuesday, 26 April 2022 at 10:23:15 UTC, Claude wrote:
It seg-faults...
Just to make it clear, it seg-faults at run-time (not at
compilation or link time) when I launch the executable "test".
On Tuesday, 26 April 2022 at 10:23:15 UTC, Claude wrote:
Hello,
Hello,
<%--SNIP--%>
Does anyone have any idea what's going on?
(if I just compile a single D file with "int main() { int* a =
new int(42); return *a; }", it works as intended.)
The `new` keyword requests the druntime GC
Hello,
I'm working on a C++ project requiring an XML parser. I decided
to make it in D so I could easily parse at run-time or
compile-time as I wish.
As our project uses a gcc tool-chain, I naturally use GDC (GCC
9.4.0).
But I have a few problems with D, linking with it, trying to use
On Tuesday, 25 January 2022 at 20:04:04 UTC, Adam D Ruppe wrote:
Not surprising at all: gdc is excellent and underrated in the
community.
The performance metrics are just a bonus. Gdc is the main reason
I can get my worksite to take D seriously since we're a
traditional unix shop (solaris
On Monday, 31 January 2022 at 10:33:49 UTC, Siarhei Siamashka
wrote:
I wonder if GDC can do the same?
GDC as a front-end doesn't dictate what the optimization passes
are doing, nor does it have any real control what each level
means. It is only ensured that semantic doesn't break because
izations
--O4 - Equivalent to -O3
--O5 - Equivalent to -O3
--Os - Like -O2 with extra
optimizations for size
--Oz - Like -Os but
reduces code size further
I wonder if GDC can do the same?
On Monday, 31 January 2022 at 08:54:16 UTC, Patrick Schluter
wrote:
-O3 often chooses longer code and unrollsmore agressively
inducing higher miss rates in the instruction caches.
-O2 can beat -O3 in some cases when code size is important.
That is generally true. My point is that GCC and
On Tuesday, 25 January 2022 at 22:41:35 UTC, Elronnd wrote:
On Tuesday, 25 January 2022 at 22:33:37 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
interesting because idivl is known to be one of the slower
instructions, but gdc nevertheless considered it not
worthwhile to replace it, whereas ldc seems obsessed about
On Saturday, 29 January 2022 at 18:28:06 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 1/29/22 10:04, Salih Dincer wrote:
> Could you also try the following
> code with the same configurations?
The program you posted with 2 million random values:
ldc 1.9 seconds
gdc 2.3 seconds
dmd 2.8 seconds
I unde
On Saturday, 29 January 2022 at 18:28:06 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
(And now we know gdc can go about 7% faster with additional
command line switches.)
No, we don't know this yet ;-) That's just what I said and I may
be bullshitting. Or the configuration of my computer is
significantly
On Saturday, 29 January 2022 at 18:28:06 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 1/29/22 10:04, Salih Dincer wrote:
> Could you also try the following code with the same
configurations?
The program you posted with 2 million random values:
ldc 1.9 seconds
gdc 2.3 seconds
dmd 2.8 seconds
I underst
On 1/29/22 10:04, Salih Dincer wrote:
> Could you also try the following code with the same configurations?
The program you posted with 2 million random values:
ldc 1.9 seconds
gdc 2.3 seconds
dmd 2.8 seconds
I understand such short tests are not definitive but to have a rough
idea betw
On Wednesday, 26 January 2022 at 18:00:41 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
For completeness (and noise :/) here is the final version of
the program:
Could you also try the following code with the same
configurations?
```d
struct LongScale {
struct ShortStack {
short[] stack;
size_t
r the hood. They can be solved
when/if we encounter them. That said, I can confirm that GDC 10
indeed fails with `multiple definition of 'rt_cmdline_enabled'`
linker error when trying to compile:
```D
extern(C) __gshared bool rt_cmdline_enabled = false;
void main() { }
```
But can't GDC just use
On Thursday, 27 January 2022 at 20:28:40 UTC, Siarhei Siamashka
wrote:
On Thursday, 27 January 2022 at 18:12:18 UTC, Johan Engelen
wrote:
But the language requires ODR, so we can emit templates as
weak_odr, telling the optimizer and linker that the symbols
should be merged _and_ that ODR can
On Thursday, 27 January 2022 at 18:12:18 UTC, Johan Engelen wrote:
But the language requires ODR, so we can emit templates as
weak_odr, telling the optimizer and linker that the symbols
should be merged _and_ that ODR can be assumed to hold (i.e.
inlining is OK).
Thanks! This was also my
On Thursday, 27 January 2022 at 16:46:59 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
What I know is that weak symbols can be overridden by strong
symbols during linking. Which means, if a function body is
inlined which also has a weak symbol, some part of the program
may be using the inlined definition and some
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 08:46:59AM -0800, Ali Çehreli via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
[...]
> I see that template instantiations are linked through weak symbols:
>
> $ nm deneme | grep foo
> [...]
> 00021380 W _D6deneme__T3fooTiZQhFNaNbNiNfZv
>
> What I know is that weak symbols can be
On 1/26/22 11:07, Siarhei Siamashka wrote:
> On Wednesday, 26 January 2022 at 18:41:51 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>> The D language shot itself in the foot by requiring templates to have
>> weak semantics.
>>
>> If DMD and LDC inline weak functions, that's their bug.
>
> As I already mentioned in
On Wednesday, 26 January 2022 at 18:41:51 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
The D language shot itself in the foot by requiring templates
to have weak semantics.
If DMD and LDC inline weak functions, that's their bug.
As I already mentioned in the bugzilla, it would be really useful
to see a
On Wednesday, 26 January 2022 at 18:39:07 UTC, Siarhei Siamashka
wrote:
It's not DMD doing a good job here, but GDC11 shooting itself
in the foot by requiring additional esoteric command line
options if you really want to produce optimized binaries.
The D language shot itself in the foot
On Wednesday, 26 January 2022 at 18:00:41 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
ldc shines with sprintf. And dmd suprises by being a little bit
faster than gdc! (?)
ldc (2.098.0): ~6.2 seconds
dmd (2.098.1): ~7.4 seconds
gdc (2.076.?): ~7.5 seconds
Again, here are the versions of the compilers
On Wednesday, 26 January 2022 at 11:43:39 UTC, forkit wrote:
On Wednesday, 26 January 2022 at 11:25:47 UTC, Iain Buclaw
wrote:
Whenever I've watched talks/demos where benchmarks were the
central topic, GDC has always blown LDC out the water when it
comes to matters of math.
..
https
ldc shines with sprintf. And dmd suprises by being a little bit faster
than gdc! (?)
ldc (2.098.0): ~6.2 seconds
dmd (2.098.1): ~7.4 seconds
gdc (2.076.?): ~7.5 seconds
Again, here are the versions of the compilers that are readily available
on my system:
> ldc: LDC - the LLVM D compi
On 1/26/22 7:06 AM, Johan wrote:
Couldn't test with LDC 1.6 (dlang2.076), because it is too old and not
running on M1/Monterey (?).
There was a range of macos dmd binaries that did not work after a
certain MacOS. I think it had to do with the hack for TLS that apple
changed, so it no longer
On 1/26/22 04:06, Johan wrote:
> The stdlib makes a huge difference in performance.
> Ali's program uses string manipulation,
Yes, on the surface, I thought my inner loop had just / and % but of
course there is that formattedWrite. I will change the code to use
sprintf into a static buffer
Linux's package
system:
>>
>> ldc: LDC - the LLVM D compiler (1.28.0):
>> based on DMD v2.098.0 and LLVM 13.0.0
>>
>> gdc: dc (GCC) 11.1.0
>>
>> dmd: DMD64 D Compiler v2.098.1
>
> What phobos version is gdc using?
Oh! Good question. Unfort
On Wednesday, 26 January 2022 at 11:25:47 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Whenever I've watched talks/demos where benchmarks were the
central topic, GDC has always blown LDC out the water when it
comes to matters of math.
..
https://dlang.org/blog/2020/05/14/lomutos-comeback/
mpiler (1.28.0):
>> based on DMD v2.098.0 and LLVM 13.0.0
>>
>> gdc: dc (GCC) 11.1.0
>>
>> dmd: DMD64 D Compiler v2.098.1
>
> What phobos version is gdc using?
Oh! Good question. Unfortunately, I don't think Phobos modules
contain that information. The followi
On 1/25/22 16:15, Johan wrote:
> On Tuesday, 25 January 2022 at 19:52:17 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
>>
>> I am using compilers installed by Manjaro Linux's package system:
>>
>> ldc: LDC - the LLVM D compiler (1.28.0):
>> based on DMD v2.098.0 and LLVM 13.0.0
>
On Tuesday, 25 January 2022 at 19:52:17 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
I am using compilers installed by Manjaro Linux's package
system:
ldc: LDC - the LLVM D compiler (1.28.0):
based on DMD v2.098.0 and LLVM 13.0.0
gdc: dc (GCC) 11.1.0
dmd: DMD64 D Compiler v2.098.1
What phobos version
On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 11:01:57PM +, forkit via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> On Tuesday, 25 January 2022 at 20:01:18 UTC, Johan wrote:
> >
> > Tough to say. Of course DMD is not a serious contender, but I
> > believe the difference between GDC and LDC is
1 - 100 of 2091 matches
Mail list logo
