On 9/23/2019 3:01 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 02:55:00PM -0700, Walter Bright via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
On 9/23/2019 10:49 AM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Will this talk be posted somewhere like Youtube afterwards?
Yes, though sometimes it doesn't due to various failure
On Tuesday, 24 September 2019 at 19:17:25 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 September 2019 at 18:24:36 UTC, Ivan Butygin
wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 September 2019 at 17:49:13 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
About bind call overhead, bind object hold pointer to shared
payload, which is allocated via malloc.
On Tuesday, 24 September 2019 at 18:24:36 UTC, Ivan Butygin wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 September 2019 at 17:49:13 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
About bind call overhead, bind object hold pointer to shared
payload, which is allocated via malloc. This payload has
function pointer (initially null).
During
On Tuesday, 24 September 2019 at 17:49:13 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
About bind call overhead, bind object hold pointer to shared
payload, which is allocated via malloc. This payload has function
pointer (initially null).
During compileDynamicCode call runtime will update this pointer
to generated
On Tuesday, 24 September 2019 at 16:48:48 UTC, kinke wrote:
[snip]
If you don't want to ship 10 fine-tuned binaries for 10
different CPUs (see `-mcpu=?`), you can use JIT to compile and
tune performance-critical pieces for the executing/target CPU.
E.g., letting the auto-vectorizer exploit
On Tuesday, 24 September 2019 at 07:41:35 UTC, Martin
Tschierschke wrote:
Thank you, I found this too, but it is more an example of the
principle, but what is the use case?
It is only useful if the instruction set of the compiling
computer differ from target
hardware and by this you get
On Monday, 23 September 2019 at 20:57:49 UTC, Ivan Butygin wrote:
[snip]
With @dynamicCompileEmit normal calls to function will go to
static version but these functions can still be targets for
bind.
The confusing thing is that if I add a normal call to foo and
then change
On Monday, 23 September 2019 at 19:40:13 UTC, Ivan Butygin wrote:
On Monday, 23 September 2019 at 12:22:47 UTC, Martin
Tschierschke wrote:
Can you please give (again?) a link or a more detailed
description of the JIT, explaining some use cases?
