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