Optimizations and performance

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 14:25:25 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
> On Friday, 10 June 2016 at 01:54:21 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
> wrote:
>> By language you usually mean a portable language, not machine 
>> language.
>
> I believe there are more platforms that have an assembler, but 
> not a C++ compiler and C++ libraries you want to use.

Huh? All platforms have an assembler.

You mean inline assembly? That's not really relevant.


>> Machine language benchmark the hardware, not the compiler.
>
> It only means assembler reaches the theoretical limit of 
> performance by choosing right language abstractions, that you 
> wanted to benchmark.

What language abstractions? There are no abstractions in machine 
language.


>>> Also what's about cost/benefit ratio?
>>
>> How do you benchmark cost/benefit?
>
> By eyeballing the source.

Not objectively measurable in a meaningful way.