Inherent code performance advantages of D over C?

[David Nadlinger]

On Thursday, 12 December 2013 at 20:46:26 UTC, Walter Bright 
wrote:
> On 12/12/2013 12:33 PM, Max Samukha wrote:
>> Don't you find it somewhat alarming that both alternative 
>> compilers follow
>> neither the standard inline asm nor ABI?
>
> I find it unfortunate. But it also can be difficult and time 
> consuming to reimplement an assembler for those back ends, so I 
> can understand why it isn't a priority.

LDC in fact implements DMD-style inline assembly (occasionally 
there are bugs, though, as it's a complete reimplementation).

I don't think it would be unreasonable to work towards a common D 
ABI on the various Posix x86_64 systems, but given that DMD comes 
with its own bespoke exception handling implementation which 
doesn't really make sense to implement in GDC/LDC (as libunwind 
is the platform standard on Linux/… anyway), there is not really 
much motivation to start work on aligning the other parts of the 
ABI either.

David