dmd codegen improvements

[deadalnix via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 18 August 2015 at 21:26:43 UTC, rsw0x wrote:
> 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.
>

I've been working on that for a while. It is definitively the 
right direction fro D IMO, but that is far from being "fairly 
easy".

> 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