dmd codegen improvements

[Manu via Digitalmars-d]

On 5 Sep 2015 12:32 am, "rsw0x via Digitalmars-d" <
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
>
> On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 22:53:01 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
>>
>> On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 21:08:51 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 10:04:58 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 09:56:55 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 06:18:54 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It is translatable to pure assembly, addressing is modulo heap size.
Performance is a different issue since it does not provide SIMD yet.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> SIMD is not even remotely close to explaining the perf difference.
>>>
>>>
>>> What browser? Only FF supports it. Chrome just JIT it IIRC.
>>
>>
>> asm.js typically runs half the speed of natively compiled code. pNaCl
run about 20% slower typically.
>>
>> The gap is way to big for vectorization to be a reasonable explanation.
In fact a large body of code just do not vectorize at all.
>>
>> You seems to be fixated on that vectorization thing, when it is not even
remotely close to the problem at hand.
>
>
> All of this could have been avoided by all browser vendors agreeing to
implement pNaCl.
> Maybe we'll be lucky and Firefox will fade into obscurity with the way
they've been handling things lately.

What I don't get is, Firefox and ie support plugins... Why isn't there a
pnacl plugin for other browsers? Surely it could be added with the existing
plugin interfaces?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20150905/ac167dd0/attachment.html>