On 4/24/14, 3:16 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 23/04/14 08:39, Walter Bright wrote:
>
>> I made a build of dmd with a collector in it. It destroyed the speed.
>> Took it out.
>
> Isn't that bad advertisement for the GC in D? Or has it something to do
> with DMD not being designed with a GC in mind?

dmd is written in C++, the collector must have been boehm

On 24 April 2014 12:01, Ary Borenszweig via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
> On 4/24/14, 3:16 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>>
>> On 23/04/14 08:39, Walter Bright wrote:
>>
>>> I made a build of dmd with a collector in it. It destroyed the speed. Took it out.
>>
>>
>> Isn't that bad advertisement for the GC in D? Or has it something to do with DMD not being designed with a GC in mind?
>
>
> dmd is written in C++, the collector must have been boehm
>

It wasn't IIRC.  'Twas in-house GC, no?

On Thursday, 24 April 2014 at 06:16:05 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 23/04/14 08:39, Walter Bright wrote:
>
>> I made a build of dmd with a collector in it. It destroyed the speed.
>> Took it out.
>
> Isn't that bad advertisement for the GC in D? Or has it something to do with DMD not being designed with a GC in mind?

Well, keep in mind we are comparing using the GC versus "doing nothing". I'd be interested in knowing the speed with *any* memory management model in DMD.

On 4/24/2014 7:16 AM, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 24 April 2014 12:01, Ary Borenszweig via Digitalmars-d
> It wasn't IIRC.  'Twas in-house GC, no?

It was with the C++ version of the original D collector.

24-Apr-2014 05:12, Marco Leise пишет:
> Am Wed, 23 Apr 2014 21:23:17 +0400
> schrieb Dmitry Olshansky <dmitry.olsh@gmail.com>:
>
>> 23-Apr-2014 20:56, Daniel Murphy пишет:
>>> "Dmitry Olshansky"  wrote in message news:lj7mrr$1p5s$1@digitalmars.com...
>>>> At a times I really don't know why can't we just drop in a Boehm GC
>>>> (the stock one, not homebrew stuff) and be done with it. Speed? There
>>>> is no point in speed if it leaks that much.
>>>
>>> Or you know, switch to D and use druntime's GC.
>>
>> Good point. Can't wait to see D-only codebase.
>
> Hmm. DMD doesn't use a known and tried, imprecise GC because
> it is a lot slower.

No it doesn't. It used a precursor of D's GC and that turned out to be slow. See Walter's post.

> How is DMD written in D using the druntime
> GC going to help that ?

GC is that easier to reach, every enhancement to D's GC becomes instantly available. Wanna make compiler faster - make D's runtime faster! ;)

> I wondered about this ever since there
> was talk about DDMD. I'm totally expecting compile times to
> multiply by 1.2 or so.

Since memory management is going to stay the same with disabled GC (at least for starters), I doubt things will change radically. If they will then it'll just highlight perf problems in D's runtime that need work.

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky

On 22 April 2014 19:09, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
> Testing a 2.065 pre-release snapshot against GDC. I see that std.algorithm now surpasses 2.1GBs of memory consumption when compiling unittests.  This is bringing my laptop down to its knees for a painful 2/3 minutes.
>
> This is time that could be better spent if the unittests where simply broken down/split up.


The final nail in the coffin was when my laptop locked up building phobos development using dmd.

Went out and bought an SSD disk and replaced my crippled HDD drive - expecting no further problems in the near future...

On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 09:34:35PM +0100, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 22 April 2014 19:09, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
> > Testing a 2.065 pre-release snapshot against GDC. I see that std.algorithm now surpasses 2.1GBs of memory consumption when compiling unittests.  This is bringing my laptop down to its knees for a painful 2/3 minutes.
> >
> > This is time that could be better spent if the unittests where simply broken down/split up.
> 
> 
> The final nail in the coffin was when my laptop locked up building phobos development using dmd.
> 
> Went out and bought an SSD disk and replaced my crippled HDD drive - expecting no further problems in the near future...

It's long past due for std.algorithm to be broken up. And this isn't the first time problems like this came up, either.

I vaguely recall someone working on an algorithms module, potentially splitting up some of the stuff from the current std.algorithm; whatever happened with that?

In fact, splitting std.algorithm has been mentioned so many times, that I feel like I should just shut up and submit a PR for it instead. Even if it gets rejected, at least it gets things moving instead of everyone talking about it yet nothing ever comes of it.


T

-- 
Perhaps the most widespread illusion is that if we were in power we would behave very differently from those who now hold it---when, in truth, in order to get power we would have to become very much like them. -- Unknown