Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-11 Thread Walter Bright
On 8/3/2013 3:28 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On Saturday, August 03, 2013 14:55:29 Walter Bright wrote: This is for testing porpoises, and of course for those that Feel Da Need For Speed. But what if I prefer to test dolphins? ;) They all look alike anyway, what's the difference?

Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-06 Thread dennis luehring
Am 05.08.2013 19:52, schrieb Walter Bright: On 8/5/2013 4:01 AM, Richard Webb wrote: Using the latest DMD and this snn.lib, i'm seeing it take about 11.5 seconds to compile the algorithm unit tests (when i tried it last week, it was taking closer to 17 seconds). For comparison, the MSVC build

Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-06 Thread Richard Webb
On 05/08/2013 18:52, Walter Bright wrote: This is hardly the first time the culprit was a library routine It's possible that other library routines are causing some of the remaining difference from the MSVC build (e.g. the profiler suggests that the DMC build spends somewhat more time

Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-06 Thread Walter Bright
On 8/6/2013 5:13 AM, Richard Webb wrote: It's possible that other library routines are causing some of the remaining difference from the MSVC build (e.g. the profiler suggests that the DMC build spends somewhat more time inside memcpy than the MSVC build). Not sure if it's down to

Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-06 Thread Kiith-Sa
On Tuesday, 6 August 2013 at 17:48:57 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 8/6/2013 5:13 AM, Richard Webb wrote: It's possible that other library routines are causing some of the remaining difference from the MSVC build (e.g. the profiler suggests that the DMC build spends somewhat more time inside

Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-06 Thread Kiith-Sa
On Tuesday, 6 August 2013 at 18:38:43 UTC, Kiith-Sa wrote: On Tuesday, 6 August 2013 at 17:48:57 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 8/6/2013 5:13 AM, Richard Webb wrote: It's possible that other library routines are causing some of the remaining difference from the MSVC build (e.g. the profiler

Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-05 Thread Richard Webb
On 03/08/2013 22:55, Walter Bright wrote: The execrable existing implementation was scrapped, and the new one uses Windows HeapAlloc(). http://ftp.digitalmars.com/snn.lib This is for testing porpoises, and of course for those that Feel Da Need For Speed. Using the latest DMD and this

Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-05 Thread dennis luehring
Am 04.08.2013 11:28, schrieb Denis Shelomovskij: 04.08.2013 1:55, Walter Bright пОшет: The execrable existing implementation was scrapped, and the new one uses Windows HeapAlloc(). http://ftp.digitalmars.com/snn.lib This is for testing porpoises, and of course for those that Feel Da Need

Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-05 Thread Walter Bright
On 8/5/2013 4:01 AM, Richard Webb wrote: Using the latest DMD and this snn.lib, i'm seeing it take about 11.5 seconds to compile the algorithm unit tests (when i tried it last week, it was taking closer to 17 seconds). For comparison, the MSVC build takes about 10 seconds on the same machine

Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-05 Thread Kagamin
On Sunday, 4 August 2013 at 09:28:11 UTC, Denis Shelomovskij wrote: So I suppose you use `HeapFree` too? Please, be sure you use this Windows API BOOL/BOOLEAN bug workaround: https://github.com/denis-sh/phobos-additions/blob/e061d1ad282b4793d1c75dfcc20962b99ec842df/unstd/windows/heap.d#L178

Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-05 Thread Mr. Anonymous
On Monday, 5 August 2013 at 21:42:11 UTC, Kagamin wrote: On Sunday, 4 August 2013 at 09:28:11 UTC, Denis Shelomovskij wrote: So I suppose you use `HeapFree` too? Please, be sure you use this Windows API BOOL/BOOLEAN bug workaround:

Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-04 Thread dennis luehring
Am 03.08.2013 23:55, schrieb Walter Bright: The execrable existing implementation was scrapped, and the new one uses Windows HeapAlloc(). http://ftp.digitalmars.com/snn.lib This is for testing porpoises, and of course for those that Feel Da Need For Speed. ever tested nedmalloc

Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-04 Thread Walter Bright
On 8/3/2013 11:07 PM, dennis luehring wrote: ever tested nedmalloc (http://www.nedprod.com/programs/portable/nedmalloc/) or other malloc allocators? No, I haven't.

Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-04 Thread Joseph Rushton Wakeling
On Sunday, 4 August 2013 at 06:07:54 UTC, dennis luehring wrote: ever tested nedmalloc (http://www.nedprod.com/programs/portable/nedmalloc/) or other malloc allocators? Windows 7, Linux 3.x, FreeBSD 8, Mac OS X 10.6 all contain state-of-the-art allocators and no third party allocator is

Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-04 Thread Walter Bright
On 8/4/2013 12:19 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: On Sunday, 4 August 2013 at 06:07:54 UTC, dennis luehring wrote: ever tested nedmalloc (http://www.nedprod.com/programs/portable/nedmalloc/) or other malloc allocators? Windows 7, Linux 3.x, FreeBSD 8, Mac OS X 10.6 all contain

Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-04 Thread dennis luehring
Am 04.08.2013 09:35, schrieb Walter Bright: On 8/4/2013 12:19 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: On Sunday, 4 August 2013 at 06:07:54 UTC, dennis luehring wrote: ever tested nedmalloc (http://www.nedprod.com/programs/portable/nedmalloc/) or other malloc allocators? Windows 7, Linux 3.x,

Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-04 Thread Walter Bright
On 8/4/2013 12:53 AM, dennis luehring wrote: HeapAlloc is a forwarder to RtlHeapAlloc and C++ new does call RtlHeapAlloc directly - would it be better to use this kernel32 api directly? (maybe if used in druntime to reduce dll dependencies) I can't find any documentation on RtlHeapAlloc.

Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-04 Thread Denis Shelomovskij
04.08.2013 11:53, dennis luehring пишет: Am 04.08.2013 09:35, schrieb Walter Bright: On 8/4/2013 12:19 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: On Sunday, 4 August 2013 at 06:07:54 UTC, dennis luehring wrote: ever tested nedmalloc (http://www.nedprod.com/programs/portable/nedmalloc/) or other

Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-04 Thread Denis Shelomovskij
04.08.2013 1:55, Walter Bright пишет: The execrable existing implementation was scrapped, and the new one uses Windows HeapAlloc(). http://ftp.digitalmars.com/snn.lib This is for testing porpoises, and of course for those that Feel Da Need For Speed. So I suppose you use `HeapFree` too?

Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-04 Thread Walter Bright
On 8/4/2013 2:28 AM, Denis Shelomovskij wrote: 04.08.2013 1:55, Walter Bright пишет: The execrable existing implementation was scrapped, and the new one uses Windows HeapAlloc(). http://ftp.digitalmars.com/snn.lib This is for testing porpoises, and of course for those that Feel Da Need For

Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-04 Thread dennis luehring
your're right it was RtlAllocateHeap Am 04.08.2013 11:25, schrieb Denis Shelomovskij: 04.08.2013 11:53, dennis luehring пОшет: Am 04.08.2013 09:35, schrieb Walter Bright: On 8/4/2013 12:19 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: On Sunday, 4 August 2013 at 06:07:54 UTC, dennis luehring

Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-03 Thread Walter Bright
On 8/3/2013 2:55 PM, Walter Bright wrote: Feel Da Need For Speed. So much better than: Feel Da Need For Reduced Elapsed Time :-)

Re: New malloc() for win32 that should produce faster DMD's and faster D code that uses malloc()

2013-08-03 Thread Jonathan M Davis
On Saturday, August 03, 2013 14:55:29 Walter Bright wrote: The execrable existing implementation was scrapped, and the new one uses Windows HeapAlloc(). http://ftp.digitalmars.com/snn.lib This is for testing porpoises, and of course for those that Feel Da Need For Speed. But what if I