Inlining Ref Functions

grauzone none at
Sun May 17 11:12:28 PDT 2009

grauzone wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 9:16 PM, grauzone <none at> wrote:
>>>> 1.  Some uber-hardcore performance freaks will not even consider D 
>>>> if it
>>>> has the
>>>> slightest bit of performance overhead compared to C++.
>>> I don't understand why D should pander to C++ freaks? If they think 
>>> their
>>> language is great, they'll just continue programming C++. Nobody 
>>> cares about
>>> them, and they will die a sad, lonely death.
>>> Just look how Java/C# are taking over C++. Even if D is slightly less
>>> efficient, it won't interfere with D's world domination plans.
>>> Rather, one should avoid cloning the more annoying C++ features. (Ah 
>>> yes, of
>>> course D makes them "better". Huh.) That's why we all use D in the first
>>> place.
>> Performance is one of the major selling points of D.  Why settle for a
>> language with sub-standard tools and lack of safety if you don't care
>> about performance?  If you don't care about performance you're
>> probably better off with one of those languages that runs on the JVM
>> or CLR.
> If you'd really care about performance, you'd code in ASM. Blurb.

Let me be a bit more serious about it: the main selling point of D are 
template meta programming features, and the fact that it's compiled 
(that is, it's light weight enough, and doesn't require a clusterfuck of 
a VM/runtime). Neither JVM nor CLR provide such a language. Else I'd use 

In contrast, there are areas where D scarifies performance for 
simplicity. The GC is an example. Generally, there's lots of features, 
which are "slow, simple and safe" by default. This seems to slowly go 
away, though.

Someone who is really interested in performance will use some of those 
C/C++ compilers and would be scared of dmd's code generator. Seeing how 
old it is and that it support x86 only, he may even break out in 
laughter. (Maybe he'll do that while waiting for his C++ compiler to 
finish compiling.)

I understand that the current trend of D is to close the performance 
gaps to C++. Actually, D seems to aim to be a "better C++". Simplicity 
is replaced by more and more obscure features, etc... With my irrational 
hate for C++, I'm not sure if I like this. I still hope that the end 
result will be something nice.

>> --bb

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list