dmd makes D appear slow

[Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d]

On 29 May 2015 20:15, "weaselcat via Digitalmars-d" <
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
>
> In nearly every benchmark I see D in, the default compiler used is dmd
which runs computationally intense tasks 4-5x+ slower than GDC/LDC
>
> example of a random blog post I found:
>
http://vaskir.blogspot.com/2015/04/computing-cryptography-hashes-rust-vs-f.html
>
> D is up to 10x(!) slower than Rust.
>
> Well... dmd is. Under LDC:
> MD5 is 5x faster,
> SHA1 is about the same,
> SHA256 is 10x faster,
> SHA512 is 10x faster.
>
> The kicker?
> _all_ of these were faster than the Rust timings(albeit by 5-10%) when
using LDC.
>
> This isn't the first time I've seen this, in basically every benchmark
featuring D I have to submit a patch/make a comment that dmd shouldn't be
used. Make no mistake, this is damaging to D's reputation - how well does
D's "native efficiency" go over when people are saying it's slower than
Scala and F#(mono)?
>
> LDC and GDC need promoted more.
>
> Bye,

It's also hurting in a lot of recent pull requests I've been seeing.
People are going out their way to micro optimise code for DMD, but
ultimately their intention ends up being rejected because of GDC/LDC
providing said optimisations for free.  It's not just PR, but also a
waste/drain on resource for people who could be better focusing their
limited free time.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20150529/e0977213/attachment.html>