On 02.08.2013 00:36, Walter Bright wrote:
I've now upgraded dmc so dmd builds can take advantage of improved code
generation.
http://www.digitalmars.com/download/freecompiler.html
Although my laptop got quite a bit faster overnight (I guess it was
throttled for some reason yesterday),
On 8/2/2013 12:57 AM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:
http://www.digitalmars.com/download/freecompiler.html
Although my laptop got quite a bit faster overnight (I guess it was throttled
for some reason yesterday), relative results don't change:
std.algorithm -main -unittest
dmc85?: 12.5 sec
dmc857:
On 02.08.2013 10:24, Walter Bright wrote:
On 8/2/2013 12:57 AM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:
http://www.digitalmars.com/download/freecompiler.html
Although my laptop got quite a bit faster overnight (I guess it was
throttled
for some reason yesterday), relative results don't change:
On 01/08/2013 00:32, Walter Bright wrote:
Thanks for doing this, this is good information.
On 7/31/2013 2:24 PM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:
I have just tried yesterdays dmd to build Visual D (it builds some
libraries and
contains a few short non-compiling tasks in between):
Debug build dmd_dmc:
Rainer Schuetze r.sagita...@gmx.de wrote in message
news:ktbvam$dvf$1...@digitalmars.com...
large-address-aware).
This shows that removing most of the allocations was a good optimization
for the dmc-Runtime, but does not have a large, but still notable impact
on a faster heap implementation
On 8/2/2013 2:47 AM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:
My disassembly looks exactly the same. I don't think that a single div operation
in a rather long function has a lot of impact on modern processors. I'm running
an i7, according to the instruction tables by Agner Fog, the div has latency of
17-28
On 8/2/2013 8:18 AM, Daniel Murphy wrote:
On a related note, I just tried replacing the two ::malloc calls in rmem's
operator new with VirtualAlloc and I get a reduction from 13 seconds to 9
seconds (compiling dmd std\range -unittest -main) with a release build of
dmd.
Hmm, very interesting!
On 02.08.2013 18:37, Walter Bright wrote:
On 8/2/2013 2:47 AM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:
My disassembly looks exactly the same. I don't think that a single div
operation
in a rather long function has a lot of impact on modern processors.
I'm running
an i7, according to the instruction tables by
On 8/2/2013 4:18 AM, Richard Webb wrote:
It still appears that the DMC malloc is a big reason for the difference between
DMC and MSVC builds when compiling the algorithm unit tests. (a very quick test
suggests that changing the global new in rmem.c to call HeapAlloc instead of
malloc gives a
02-Aug-2013 20:40, Walter Bright пишет:
On 8/2/2013 8:18 AM, Daniel Murphy wrote:
On a related note, I just tried replacing the two ::malloc calls in
rmem's
operator new with VirtualAlloc and I get a reduction from 13 seconds to 9
seconds (compiling dmd std\range -unittest -main) with a release
On 01.08.2013 07:33, dennis luehring wrote:
Am 31.07.2013 23:24, schrieb Rainer Schuetze:
On 31.07.2013 09:00, Walter Bright wrote:
On 7/30/2013 11:40 PM, dennis luehring wrote:
currently the vc builded dmd is about 2 times faster in compiling
That's an old number now. Someone want to
Am 01.08.2013 08:16, schrieb Rainer Schuetze:
On 01.08.2013 07:33, dennis luehring wrote:
Am 31.07.2013 23:24, schrieb Rainer Schuetze:
On 31.07.2013 09:00, Walter Bright wrote:
On 7/30/2013 11:40 PM, dennis luehring wrote:
currently the vc builded dmd is about 2 times faster in
On 7/30/2013 11:40 PM, dennis luehring wrote:
currently the vc builded dmd is about 2 times faster in compiling
That's an old number now. Someone want to try it with the current HEAD?
Am 31.07.2013 09:00, schrieb Walter Bright:
On 7/30/2013 11:40 PM, dennis luehring wrote:
currently the vc builded dmd is about 2 times faster in compiling
That's an old number now. Someone want to try it with the current HEAD?
tried to but failed
downloaded dmd-master.zip (from github)
On 31.07.2013 09:00, Walter Bright wrote:
On 7/30/2013 11:40 PM, dennis luehring wrote:
currently the vc builded dmd is about 2 times faster in compiling
That's an old number now. Someone want to try it with the current HEAD?
I have just tried yesterdays dmd to build Visual D (it builds
Thanks for doing this, this is good information.
On 7/31/2013 2:24 PM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:
I have just tried yesterdays dmd to build Visual D (it builds some libraries and
contains a few short non-compiling tasks in between):
Debug build dmd_dmc: 23 sec, std new 43 sec
Debug build dmd_msc:
Am 31.07.2013 23:24, schrieb Rainer Schuetze:
On 31.07.2013 09:00, Walter Bright wrote:
On 7/30/2013 11:40 PM, dennis luehring wrote:
currently the vc builded dmd is about 2 times faster in compiling
That's an old number now. Someone want to try it with the current HEAD?
I have just
DMC is ugly compiler.
It will be much nicer if you'll use mingw for that purpose on
Windows. GCC usually generates more faster code that VC does.
http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingwbuilds/
On Tuesday, 30 July 2013 at 09:04:10 UTC, Temtaime wrote:
DMC is ugly compiler.
It will be much nicer if you'll use mingw for that purpose on
Windows. GCC usually generates more faster code that VC does.
http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingwbuilds/
I'm willing to bet Walter would accept pull
On 7/30/2013 11:16 AM, Brad Anderson wrote:
Sidenote: Insulting Walter's work isn't a great way to get him to do your a
favor.
I'm sad that I never got the opportunity to be insulted by Jobs.
Am 25.07.2013 20:03, schrieb Walter Bright:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1j1i30/increasing_the_d_compiler_speed_by_over_75/
do you compare dmc based and visualc based dmd builds?
the vc dmd build seems to be always two times faster - how does that
look with your optimization?
On Thursday, 25 July 2013 at 18:03:22 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1j1i30/increasing_the_d_compiler_speed_by_over_75/
I just reported this compile speed killer:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10716
It has a big impact on some of the
On 7/26/2013 1:25 AM, dennis luehring wrote:
do you compare dmc based and visualc based dmd builds?
the vc dmd build seems to be always two times faster - how does that look with
your optimization?
It would be most interesting to see just what it was that made the vc build
faster.
But that
On Thu, 25 Jul 2013 20:04:10 +0200
Brad Anderson e...@gnuk.net wrote:
On Thursday, 25 July 2013 at 18:03:22 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1j1i30/increasing_the_d_compiler_speed_by_over_75/
I propose we always refer to compiling as doing the nasty
24 matches
Mail list logo
