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 of
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.
One of the historical reasons for favoring -O2 optimiz
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 Clan
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 understand such
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 different
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 understand such s
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 between tw
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 ind
On Friday, 28 January 2022 at 18:02:27 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
For example, druntime depends on this behaviour.
Template:
https://github.com/dlang/druntime/blob/a0ad8c42c15942faeeafb016e81a360113ae1b6b/src/rt/config.d#L46-L58
Ouch. From where I stand, this looks like some really ugly hack
ab
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 be
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 impr
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 ov
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 the
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 practical
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 by
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 that are read
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://dlan
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 compiler (1.
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 (in
On Wednesday, 26 January 2022 at 11:25:47 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On Wednesday, 26 January 2022 at 04:28:25 UTC, Ali Çehreli
wrote:
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
sys
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/
On Wednesday, 26 January 2022 at 04:28:25 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
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 D
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
>>
>> gdc: dc (GCC) 11.1.0
>>
>> dmd: D
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 is gdc
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 very small and really
> > in the detai
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 very small and
really in the details, i.e. you'll have to look at assembly to
find out the delta.
Have you tried `--enable-cro
On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 10:41:35PM +, Elronnd via Digitalmars-d-learn 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, whe
On 1/25/22 14:33, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> This is very interesting
Fascinating code generation and investigation! :)
Ali
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 avoid idivl at
all costs.
Interesting indeed. Two remarks:
On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 01:30:59PM -0800, Ali Çehreli via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
[...]
> I posted the program to have more eyes on the assembly. ;)
[...]
I tested the code locally, and observed, just like Ali did, that the LDC
version is unambiguously slower than the gdc version by a small ma
On 1/25/22 12:42, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>> For a test run for 2 million numbers:
>>
>> ldc: ~0.95 seconds
>> gdc: ~0.79 seconds
>> dmd: ~1.77 seconds
>
> For measurements under 1 second, I'm skeptical of the accuracy, because
> there could be all kinds of background noise, CPU interrupts and stuff
>
On 1/25/22 12:59, Daniel N wrote:
Maybe you can try --ffast-math on ldc.
Did not make a difference.
Ali
On 1/25/22 12:01, Johan wrote:
Have you tried `--enable-cross-module-inlining` with LDC?
Tried now. Makes no difference that I can sense, likely because there is
only one module anyway. :) (But I guess it works over Phobos modules too.)
Ali
On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 08:04:04PM +, Adam D Ruppe via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> On Tuesday, 25 January 2022 at 19:52:17 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
> > ldc: ~0.95 seconds
> > gdc: ~0.79 seconds
> > dmd: ~1.77 seconds
>
> Not surprising at all: gdc is excellent and underrated in the
> communit
On 1/25/22 11:52, Ali Çehreli wrote:
> a program I wrote about spelling-out parts of a number
Here is the program as a single module:
module spellout.spellout;
// This program was written as a code kata to spell out
// certain parts of integers as in "1 million 2 thousand
// 42". Note that thi
On Tuesday, 25 January 2022 at 20:04:04 UTC, Adam D Ruppe wrote:
On Tuesday, 25 January 2022 at 19:52:17 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
ldc: ~0.95 seconds
gdc: ~0.79 seconds
dmd: ~1.77 seconds
Maybe you can try --ffast-math on ldc.
On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 11:52:17AM -0800, Ali Çehreli via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> Sorry for being vague and not giving the code here but a program I
> wrote about spelling-out parts of a number (in Turkish) as in "1
> milyon 42" runs much faster with gdc.
>
> The program integer-divides the
On Tuesday, 25 January 2022 at 19:52:17 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
ldc: ~0.95 seconds
gdc: ~0.79 seconds
dmd: ~1.77 seconds
Not surprising at all: gdc is excellent and underrated in the
community.
On Tuesday, 25 January 2022 at 19:52:17 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
I am not experienced with dub but I used
--build=release-nobounds and verified that -O3 is used for both
compilers. (I also tried building manually with GNU 'make' with
e.g. -O5 and the results were similar.)
`-O5` does not do
Sorry for being vague and not giving the code here but a program I wrote
about spelling-out parts of a number (in Turkish) as in "1 milyon 42"
runs much faster with gdc.
The program integer-divides the number in a loop to find quotients and
adds the word next to it. One obvious optimization mi
44 matches
Mail list logo
