dmd codegen improvements

rsw0x via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Tue Aug 18 14:26:41 PDT 2015


On Tuesday, 18 August 2015 at 21:18:34 UTC, rsw0x wrote:
> On Tuesday, 18 August 2015 at 10:45:49 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> Martin ran some benchmarks recently that showed that ddmd 
>> compiled with dmd was about 30% slower than when compiled with 
>> gdc/ldc. This seems to be fairly typical.
>>
>> I'm interested in ways to reduce that gap.
>
> retire dmd?
> this is ridiculous.

To further expand upon this,
if you want to make D fast - Fix the interface between the 
compiler and the runtime(including the inability for compilers to 
inline simple things like allocations which makes allocations 
have massive overheads.) Then, fix the GC. Make the GC both 
shared and immutable aware, then moving the GC to a thread local 
"island"-style GC would be fairly easy. D's GC is probably the 
slowest GC of any major language available, and the entire thing 
is wrapped in mutexes.

D has far, far bigger performance problems that dmd's backend.

Maybe you should take a look at what Go has recently done with 
their GC to get an idea of what D's competition has been up to. 
https://talks.golang.org/2015/go-gc.pdf


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list