Red Hat's issues in considering the D language

[Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d]

On 12/21/16 7:09 PM, Jerry wrote:
> On Wednesday, 21 December 2016 at 21:27:57 UTC, Jack Stouffer wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 21 December 2016 at 21:12:07 UTC, Jerry wrote:
>>> Any other backend would be better. DMD with -O takes over an hour for
>>> my project to compile. In comparison LDC with -O3 takes less than a
>>> minute and produces a faster binary. It doesn't really make sense to
>>> increase the workload maintaining 2-3 different compilers when D is
>>> already lacking manpower.
>>
>> A 60:1 speedup? I've never heard of that big of a difference before.
>> Especially since LDC is typically slower to compile, even on massive
>> code bases like Weka's.
>>
>> Could you please file a bug with some details?
>
> I ran it again, was a bit over a minute. But still 1 min 30 seconds
> compared to an hour.
>
> 1:07:40.162314 -- dmd with -O
> 0:01:28.632916 -- ldc2 with -O
>
> 0:00:23.802639 -- dmd without -O
> 0:00:33.818080 -- ldc2 without -O
>
> It'd be quite a bit of work to narrow down what it is and if it has
> something to do with how many structures I use or otherwise. I'd have to
> try and emulate that with test code as I can't use my code. Then the
> issue would just sit there for who knows how long. It's not that big of
> an issue, as I just use ldc2 instead anyways.

Would be great to narrow this down regardless. Shouldn't be too 
difficult since the penalty is so huge. Must be a pathological case we 
should fix anyway. -- Andrei