stdio and Tango I/O performance

[Lars Ivar Igesund]

Andrei Alexandrescu (See Website For Email) wrote:

> Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
>> Andrei Alexandrescu (See Website For Email) wrote:
>> 
>>> This ate a lot of time measuring, testing, and optimizing. So I have a
>>> question - has anyone verified that Tango's I/O performance is up to
>>> snuff? I see it imposes the dynamic-polymorphic approach, and unless
>>> there was some serious performance work going on, it's possible it's
>>> even slower than stdio.
>> 
>> If you have actually tested Tango IO and finds it to be slower than
>> the "new" stdio, then this would be interesting to know, and also the
>> test harness in use. If not, I find your suggestive tone above to be
>> rather rude, given the time put into making Tango IO as good as possible.
>> If the IO in Phobos has been as slow as you say, I highly doubt that
>> Tango has been in similar ranges, given that it obviates C IO by going
>> directly to the OS via a buffer.
>> 
>> Now, if you have tested that Tango's IO is slower than Phobos, then maybe
>> you could spend some time helping to improve it too? Your approach above
>> is rather unconstructive in an overall fashion.
> 
> This is a misunderstanding. To date I haven't downloaded Tango.

Then you should before making any sorts of comments in this vein. Maybe you
even should have compared Tango's IO performance to Phobos' prior to making
such huge efforts to improve on it (Phobos IO)?

-- 
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource, #d.tango & #D: larsivi
Dancing the Tango