Required DMD changes for Mir and few thoughts about D future

Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Mon Sep 26 18:17:16 PDT 2016


On 9/27/16 2:52 AM, Joakim wrote:
> Why not?  I think people will understand that ldc is meant for higher
> performance, which you want from such code anyway.

I'm not going to argue this much further. Essentially Mir is touted as a 
highly generic and portable library. Having it only work on one language 
implementation works against that statement, the credibility of Mir, and 
the credibility of D as an universal platform for creating fast code. 
One way or another we need to get Mir to be portable across all D 
implementations and hopefully convince Ilya to move it into D's standard 
library.

Put another way: we have a beautiful use case of what primitives we need 
to offer to allow definition of a generic library that beats the pants 
off hand-optimized assembler. We should be all over implementing said 
primitives. There's clear proof and there's a clean short list of things 
we need to do. If we're asking ourselves "what kind of primitives we 
should add to D to make it awesomely fast?" this is the best experience 
report we could ever hope for.

Instead of debating minor things herein, and instead of adding "little 
projects that could" to an ever-growing wishlist, we should rally behind 
a real strong project and take it from provincial notability to global 
success. I've said in the past I'm not that good, but I am good enough 
to recognize great work. Ilya's work is that.


Andrei



More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list