32-bit DMD compiled programs prints "segmentation fault"
kinke
kinke at gmx.net
Tue Nov 5 13:32:22 UTC 2019
On Tuesday, 5 November 2019 at 12:11:24 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> dmd is still significantly faster to run
Without `-O -release`, otherwise LDC is usually faster.
> and to recompile!
Depends on what you are working on. If it's just the frontend,
then recompilation should take exactly as much time as DMD with
appropriate settings. If it's just a .cpp file, then it's fast as
well; if it's a C++ header file included by many .cpp's, then it
can take some time.
>> (LDC's frontend is identical to DMD's so there's no difference
>> there.)
>
> That's not quite true. They share about 98% of the code, but
> that remaining 2% can be significant at times.
The glue code is much more than e.g. gluelayer.d and objc_glue.d;
at its core, LDC and GDC are glue code, translating the
frontend's AST to the LLVM/gcc intermediate representation. It
doesn't help that DMD's source tree doesn't clearly separate
frontend and glue code (which includes e2ir.d, s2ir.d etc.).
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list