Coolest D features

[Sean Kelly]

Waldemar wrote:
> == Quote from Walter Bright (newshound at digitalmars.com)'s article
>> Georg Wrede wrote:
>>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>>> Jason House wrote:
>>>>> It was reported that D was slower than C by a factor of 1.5.
>>>> I bet that if they compared DMD with DMC, they'd have found no
>>>> difference.
>>> That makes it sound like DMC is 1.5 slower than your average C.
>> Your average C? No. It might be 1.5 slower than the specific C compiler
>> the benchmarker used for that specific application. Performance for
>> particular applications varies all over the map for different C compilers.
> 
> That may be but this specific C compiler is most likely gcc on Linux or VS C++ on
> Windows.  The D compiler is probably dmd.  It's a bit shocking to see a 50%
> difference.  Is there information which compilers were used?  And is there any
> reason to believe the specifics of the benchmark could produce such a wide difference?

In the past it's been mentioned that DMD (and DMC by extension, I 
assume) produces somewhat sub-optimal code for floating-point ops, and 
there may be one or two other scenarios as well.  So any test that uses 
these features heavily may present a somewhat skewed display of language 
performance.


Sean