July 08, 2012
On Sat, 07 Jul 2012 23:47:45 -0700, Walter Bright <newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote:

> On 7/7/2012 9:16 PM, Adam Wilson wrote:
>> I still see pretty heinous backend problems crop up in
>> the bug reports for DMD.
>
> Come on, it's pretty stable. Do you watch the bug reports for gcc? I remember a guy recently ran some exhaustive code gen tests over C compilers, and dmc (the same back end as dmd) was the only one that did them correctly.
>
> http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4131508

I stand corrected. :) It is true that I don't watch the GCC/LLVM buglists.

-- 
Adam Wilson
IRC: LightBender
Project Coordinator
The Horizon Project
http://www.thehorizonproject.org/
July 08, 2012
On 2012-07-07 20:49, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 7/7/2012 3:46 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>> Theoretically you should be able to just look at the documentation
>
>
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!
>

Yeah, I know how you feel about documentation.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg


July 08, 2012
On 2012-07-08 06:16, Adam Wilson wrote:

> As to compile speed, is LDC really *THAT* much slower than DMD so as to
> cause C++ style speed issues? I thought one of the whole points of D is
> that it doesn't need the epic numbers of passes and preprocessor that
> C++ does precisely because that's what slows down C++ so much...

No, LDC is still faster than C++ but slower than DMD. It's not the frontend that is the problem, it's the backend.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg


July 08, 2012
On 7/7/2012 11:05 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>
> Compilation is a huge bottleneck for any major C++ code base, and adding
> hardware (distributing compilation etc) is survival, but definitely
> doesn't scale to make the problem negligible.
>
> In contrast, programmers have considerable control about generating fast
> code.
>

Our bottleneck with a large C++ codebase (Unreal Engine based game) is linking.  Granted we have beefy workstations (HP Z800 with dual quad or hex core xeons and hyperthreading), but a full build+link is 4-5 min, and a single change+link is over 2 min.

You can also speed up C++ compiling by merging a bunch of the .cpp files together (google "unity c++ build"), though if you go too crazy you will learn compilers eventually do explode when fed 5-10 megs of source code per translation unit heh.
July 09, 2012
On Sun, 08 Jul 2012 13:26:53 +0200, Jacob Carlborg <doob@me.com> wrote:

> On 2012-07-07 20:49, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 7/7/2012 3:46 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>>> Theoretically you should be able to just look at the documentation
>>
>>
>> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!
>>
>
> Yeah, I know how you feel about documentation.
>


You mean there are actually people out there who believe documentation
can be correct, not to mention understandable, comprehensive and giving
the information you need?
July 09, 2012
On Monday, July 09, 2012 22:43:19 Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Jul 2012 13:26:53 +0200, Jacob Carlborg <doob@me.com> wrote:
> > On 2012-07-07 20:49, Walter Bright wrote:
> >> On 7/7/2012 3:46 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> >>> Theoretically you should be able to just look at the documentation
> >> 
> >> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!
> > 
> > Yeah, I know how you feel about documentation.
> 
> You mean there are actually people out there who believe documentation can be correct, not to mention understandable, comprehensive and giving the information you need?

Of course, it _can_ be, but assuming that it _is_ is another thing entirely. Good, accurate, up-to-date documentation does exist. It just isn't the norm.

- Jonathan M Davis
July 10, 2012
On 2012-07-09 22:43, Simen Kjaeraas wrote:

> You mean there are actually people out there who believe documentation
> can be correct, not to mention understandable, comprehensive and giving
> the information you need?

You do know there are closed source libraries where you don't have an option.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
July 10, 2012
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 08:33:17 +0200, Jacob Carlborg <doob@me.com> wrote:

> On 2012-07-09 22:43, Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
>
>> You mean there are actually people out there who believe documentation
>> can be correct, not to mention understandable, comprehensive and giving
>> the information you need?
>
> You do know there are closed source libraries where you don't have an option.
>

I know. I also know I have spent days on forums trying to find answers that
were not covered by that documentation. But this is turning stupid. We both
know documentation is not always 100%, and that it sometimes is good enough.

-- 
Simen
Next ›   Last »
1 2 3 4 5 6
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home