dmd codegen improvements

[H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d]

On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 07:38:43PM +0000, deadalnix via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Tuesday, 18 August 2015 at 17:31:50 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> >On 2015-08-18 17:22, Joakim wrote:
> >
> >>Well, you have to admit that it's pretty impressive that dmd's
> >>backend gets within 30% of those monumental backends despite having
> >>pretty much only Walter working on it sporadically.
> >
> >DMD has only a very limited set of targets compared to LLVM and GCC.
> >So they need more manpower to maintain and enhance the backends.
> 
> Target are the tip of the iceberg. GCC and LLVM do most of their magic
> in the middle, that is common accross front ends and targets. And
> honestly, there is no way DMD can catch up.

DMD's optimizer is far behind GDC/LDC.  Every one of my own programs
that I ran a profiler on, shows a 30-50% decrease in performance when
compiled (with all optimization flags on) with DMD, as opposed to GDC.
For CPU-intensive programs, DMD's optimizer has a long way to go.


T

-- 
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth? -- Michael Beibl