stdio performance in tango, stdlib, and perl

[Andrei Alexandrescu (See Website For Email)]

kris wrote:
> Andrei Alexandrescu (See Website For Email) wrote:
>> kris wrote:
> [snip]
>>> Tango should still come out in front, although I have to say that 
>>> benchmarks don't really tell very much in general i.e. doesn't mean 
>>> much of anything important whether tango "wins" this or not (IMO)
>>
>>
>> Why not? 
> 
> If tango were terribly terribly slow instead, then it would be cause for 
> concern. If I have some program that needs to run faster I'll find a way 
> to do just that; another reason why tango.io is fairly modular

That's great, but by and large, the attitude that "this is the simple 
version; if you want performance, you gotta work for it" is precisely 
what I don't like about certain languages and APIs. This is, for 
example, why not everybody really condemns C++ iostreams in spite of 
them being a pinnacle of counter-performance in any contest, be it 
beauty, size, or speed. People know that C++ can do fast I/O and are 
driven by the attitude that you gotta work for it - there's no other way.

Just make the clear and simple code fastest. One thing I like about D is 
that it clearly strives to achieve best performance for simply-written code.

> [snip]
> 
>> I was actually surprised that nobody noticed phobos' low I/O speed in 
>> years. It's a maker or breaker for me and many others.
> 
> That assumes IO performance wasn't brought up as an issue before ;)
> 
> 
>> If there's any chance that automated chopping could be removed from 
>> Tango, that would be awesome. Also it would be great to fix the 
>> incompatibility created by using read/write instead of getline.
> 
> Sure; could you submit a ticket for it, please, lest it fall by the 
> wayside?
> 
> http://www.dsource.org/projects/tango/newticket

For the \n, read/write, or both? :o)


Andrei