dmd-x64

[retard]

Wed, 23 Dec 2009 17:04:49 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:

> bearophile wrote:
>> You are right. It's not easy to give average numbers for any kind of C
>> or C++ software. In benchmark-like code I've seen up to 20-25%
>> improvements, but I assume that in much larger programs the situation
>> is different. Probably if you try to compute a true average, the
>> average percentage of improvement is lower, like 5% or less. It's a
>> feature useful for hot spots of the code.
> 
> 
> Small benchmarks tend to have a high 'beta', or variance from the norm.
> The results in actual applications tend to be much closer together.

It's difficult to measure performance improvements overall in 
applications like image manipulation software or sound wave editors. E.g. 
if a complex effect processing takes now 2 seconds instead of 4 hours, 
but all GUI event processing is 100% slower, during the workday the 
application might only work 10% faster overall. The user spends much more 
time in the interactive part of the code. From what I've read, bearophile 
mostly only uses synthetic tests.