After reading

https://forum.dlang.org/thread/nlhybmioaoxkydicmtjj@forum.dlang.org

it's about time I announce my little Python snippet that exercises the compilation speed of D and other languages with a superficial test program generator at

https://github.com/nordlow/compiler-benchmark

Run as

   ./benchmark.py

This generates a single source file for each supported language, currently D, C, C++, Go and Rust, containing 50k number of trivial functions that from the main function are called and reduced to a single integer which is returned at the end of main. The benchmark then measures the time it takes for each compiler to run semantic analysis on the source file (excluding output of any object files).

My only question is:
How is it possible for Rust be to 50x slower than D in this test!!!??? Am I calling rustc in the wrong way? Especially taking into account the amount of time (and money) that has been put into making Rust fast(er). Through fancy caching of IR-files and more.

I very much welcome PRs that add more languages.

Output on Ubuntu 18.04 system is

Code-generation:
Generating generated/c/foo.c took 0.073 seconds (C)
Generating generated/c++/foo.c++ took 0.073 seconds (C++)
Generating generated/d/foo.d took 0.076 seconds (D)
Generating generated/rust/foo.rs took 0.076 seconds (Rust)
Generating generated/zig/foo.zig took 0.077 seconds (Zig)
Generating generated/go/foo.go took 0.074 seconds (Go)

Clang:
- Checking of generated/c/foo.c took 1.373 seconds (using "/usr/bin/clang-7")
- Checking of generated/c++/foo.c++ took 1.345 seconds (using "/usr/bin/clang++-7")

GCC:
- Checking of generated/c/foo.c took 0.385 seconds (using "/usr/bin/gcc-5")
- Checking of generated/c++/foo.c++ took 0.675 seconds (using "/usr/bin/g++-5")
- Checking of generated/c/foo.c took 0.551 seconds (using "/usr/bin/gcc-6")
- Checking of generated/c/foo.c took 0.518 seconds (using "/usr/bin/gcc-7")
- Checking of generated/c++/foo.c++ took 1.294 seconds (using "/usr/bin/g++-7")
- Checking of generated/c/foo.c took 0.527 seconds (using "/usr/bin/gcc-8")
- Checking of generated/c++/foo.c++ took 1.363 seconds (using "/usr/bin/g++-8")

D:
- Checking of generated/d/foo.d took 0.403 seconds (using "/usr/bin/dmd")
- Checking of generated/d/foo.d took 0.352 seconds (using "/home/per/.local/ldc2-1.15.0-beta1-linux-x86_64/bin/ldmd2")

Go:
- Checking of generated/go/foo.go took 1.716 seconds (using "/usr/bin/gccgo")

Rust:
- Checking of generated/rust/foo.rs took 17.828 seconds (using "/home/per/.cargo/bin/rustc")

Zig:
Speedups:
- D to gcc-8: 1.50
- D to g++-8: 3.88
- D to Clang: 3.90
- D to Clang++: 3.83
- D to Go: 4.88
- D to Rust: 50.71

On 2019-03-16 22:23, Per Nordlöw wrote:
> After reading
> 
> https://forum.dlang.org/thread/nlhybmioaoxkydicmtjj@forum.dlang.org
> 
> it's about time I announce my little Python snippet that exercises the compilation speed of D and other languages with a superficial test program generator at
> 
> https://github.com/nordlow/compiler-benchmark
> 
> Run as
> 
>     ./benchmark.py
> 
> This generates a single source file for each supported language, currently D, C, C++, Go and Rust, containing 50k number of trivial functions that from the main function are called and reduced to a single integer which is returned at the end of main. The benchmark then measures the time it takes for each compiler to run semantic analysis on the source file (excluding output of any object files).
> 
> My only question is:
> How is it possible for Rust be to 50x slower than D in this test!!!??? Am I calling rustc in the wrong way? Especially taking into account the amount of time (and money) that has been put into making Rust fast(er). Through fancy caching of IR-files and more.
> 
> I very much welcome PRs that add more languages.
> 
> Output on Ubuntu 18.04 system is
> 
> Code-generation:
> Generating generated/c/foo.c took 0.073 seconds (C)
> Generating generated/c++/foo.c++ took 0.073 seconds (C++)
> Generating generated/d/foo.d took 0.076 seconds (D)
> Generating generated/rust/foo.rs took 0.076 seconds (Rust)
> Generating generated/zig/foo.zig took 0.077 seconds (Zig)
> Generating generated/go/foo.go took 0.074 seconds (Go)
> 
> Clang:
> - Checking of generated/c/foo.c took 1.373 seconds (using "/usr/bin/clang-7")
> - Checking of generated/c++/foo.c++ took 1.345 seconds (using "/usr/bin/clang++-7")
> 
> GCC:
> - Checking of generated/c/foo.c took 0.385 seconds (using "/usr/bin/gcc-5")
> - Checking of generated/c++/foo.c++ took 0.675 seconds (using "/usr/bin/g++-5")
> - Checking of generated/c/foo.c took 0.551 seconds (using "/usr/bin/gcc-6")
> - Checking of generated/c/foo.c took 0.518 seconds (using "/usr/bin/gcc-7")
> - Checking of generated/c++/foo.c++ took 1.294 seconds (using "/usr/bin/g++-7")
> - Checking of generated/c/foo.c took 0.527 seconds (using "/usr/bin/gcc-8")
> - Checking of generated/c++/foo.c++ took 1.363 seconds (using "/usr/bin/g++-8")
> 
> D:
> - Checking of generated/d/foo.d took 0.403 seconds (using "/usr/bin/dmd")
> - Checking of generated/d/foo.d took 0.352 seconds (using "/home/per/.local/ldc2-1.15.0-beta1-linux-x86_64/bin/ldmd2")
> 
> Go:
> - Checking of generated/go/foo.go took 1.716 seconds (using "/usr/bin/gccgo")
> 
> Rust:
> - Checking of generated/rust/foo.rs took 17.828 seconds (using "/home/per/.cargo/bin/rustc")
> 
> Zig:
> Speedups:
> - D to gcc-8: 1.50
> - D to g++-8: 3.88
> - D to Clang: 3.90
> - D to Clang++: 3.83
> - D to Go: 4.88
> - D to Rust: 50.71

It would be interesting to measure D's speed with DMD compiled with LDC as the host D compiler.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On Sunday, 17 March 2019 at 09:17:06 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> It would be interesting to measure D's speed with DMD compiled with LDC as the host D compiler.

I thought that already is the case...

On 2019-03-17 21:09, Per Nordlöw wrote:

> I thought that already is the case...

No, the official binaries are built with DMD as the host compiler.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On Monday, 18 March 2019 at 10:05:40 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2019-03-17 21:09, Per Nordlöw wrote:
>
>> I thought that already is the case...
>
> No, the official binaries are built with DMD as the host compiler.

How come they're not built with LDC (for example) and then distributed? I'd think it'd be shit tonnes more performant?

On Monday, 18 March 2019 at 11:02:55 UTC, aliak wrote:
> On Monday, 18 March 2019 at 10:05:40 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>> On 2019-03-17 21:09, Per Nordlöw wrote:
>>
>>> I thought that already is the case...
>>
>> No, the official binaries are built with DMD as the host compiler.
>
> How come they're not built with LDC (for example) and then distributed? I'd think it'd be shit tonnes more performant?

Yes it would be _a lot_ faster, but the release process is pretty complicated [1] and at the moment Martin is the only one who fully understands it and he's pretty busy with his day job and other tasks.

[1] https://github.com/dlang/installer

On Monday, 18 March 2019 at 12:33:12 UTC, Seb wrote:
> On Monday, 18 March 2019 at 11:02:55 UTC, aliak wrote:
>> On Monday, 18 March 2019 at 10:05:40 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>>> On 2019-03-17 21:09, Per Nordlöw wrote:
>>>
>>>> I thought that already is the case...
>>>
>>> No, the official binaries are built with DMD as the host compiler.
>>
>> How come they're not built with LDC (for example) and then distributed? I'd think it'd be shit tonnes more performant?
>
> Yes it would be _a lot_ faster, but the release process is pretty complicated [1] and at the moment Martin is the only one who fully understands it and he's pretty busy with his day job and other tasks.
>
> [1] https://github.com/dlang/installer

It would be great if a campaign (donations) could be created to overwork the release process. There are some quite important topics like 64 bit DMD for windows or the LDC builds.

Also the process should be easier and maybe even documented.

Kind regards
Andre

On Monday, 18 March 2019 at 10:05:40 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2019-03-17 21:09, Per Nordlöw wrote:
>
>> I thought that already is the case...
>
> No, the official binaries are built with DMD as the host compiler.


Is v2.0xx compiled with v2.0xx-1 or with v2.0xx itself?

Andrea

On 2019-03-18 15:49, Andrea Fontana wrote:

> Is v2.0xx compiled with v2.0xx-1 or with v2.0xx itself?

With v2.0xx-1, as far as I understand.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On Monday, 18 March 2019 at 12:33:12 UTC, Seb wrote:
> [1] https://github.com/dlang/installer

Does this include a script for building dmd with ldc or this not yet possible?