Performance dmd vs ldc2

[Chris]

On Wednesday, 24 July 2013 at 12:11:50 UTC, bearophile wrote:
> Chris:
>
>> ldmd2 compiles the code much faster than ldc2 (~4 secs vs 14 
>> secs). The program runs just as fast (as far as I can see at 
>> the moment).
>
> The ldmd2 binary is tiny, it's not a compiler, it's just a 
> wrapper. If the compilation time is different then they are can 
> calling the compiler with different compilation switches.
>
> Bye,
> bearophile

Thanks for clarifying that. I am still impressed with the 
performance. Although I'm sure I could squeeze a bit more out of 
dmd. As of now I'm only using the garden-variety (i.e. dmd 
-release [files]). I didn't use any switches with ldc2, though.