http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1j1i30/increasing_the_d_compiler_speed_by_over_75/

On Thursday, 25 July 2013 at 18:03:22 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1j1i30/increasing_the_d_compiler_speed_by_over_75/

I propose we always refer to compiling as "doing the nasty" from this moment forward.

On Thu, 25 Jul 2013 20:04:10 +0200
"Brad Anderson" <eco@gnuk.net> wrote:

> On Thursday, 25 July 2013 at 18:03:22 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> > http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1j1i30/increasing_the_d_compiler_speed_by_over_75/
> 
> I propose we always refer to compiling as "doing the nasty" from this moment forward.

Yea, that's just absolutely classic :)

Am 25.07.2013 20:03, schrieb Walter Bright:
> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1j1i30/increasing_the_d_compiler_speed_by_over_75/
>

do you compare dmc based and visualc based dmd builds?
the vc dmd build seems to be always two times faster - how does that look with your optimization?

On Thursday, 25 July 2013 at 18:03:22 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1j1i30/increasing_the_d_compiler_speed_by_over_75/


I just reported this compile speed killer:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10716

It has a big impact on some of the tests in the DMD test suite. It might also be responsible for a significant part of the compilation time of Phobos, since array literals tend to be widely used inside unittest functions.

On 7/26/2013 1:25 AM, dennis luehring wrote:
> do you compare dmc based and visualc based dmd builds?
> the vc dmd build seems to be always two times faster - how does that look with
> your optimization?

It would be most interesting to see just what it was that made the vc build faster.

But that won't help on Linux/FreeBSD/OSX.

DMC is ugly compiler.
It will be much nicer if you'll use mingw for that purpose on Windows. GCC usually generates more faster code that VC does.
http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingwbuilds/

On Tuesday, 30 July 2013 at 09:04:10 UTC, Temtaime wrote:
> DMC is ugly compiler.
> It will be much nicer if you'll use mingw for that purpose on Windows. GCC usually generates more faster code that VC does.
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingwbuilds/

I'm willing to bet Walter would accept pull requests to add support for mingw like he did with VC.  Be sure to document the build process when you make the changes.

Sidenote: Insulting Walter's work isn't a great way to get him to do your a favor.

On 7/30/2013 11:16 AM, Brad Anderson wrote:
> Sidenote: Insulting Walter's work isn't a great way to get him to do your a favor.

I'm sad that I never got the opportunity to be insulted by Jobs.

Am 30.07.2013 11:04, schrieb Temtaime:
> DMC is ugly compiler.
> It will be much nicer if you'll use mingw for that purpose on
> Windows. GCC usually generates more faster code that VC does.
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingwbuilds/
>

> DMC is ugly compiler.

ugly means bad or miss-designed, but please show me a better 16/32(64) bit full c/c++ compiler out there

> GCC usually generates more faster code that VC does.

currently the vc builded dmd is about 2 times faster in compiling, do
you think that a mingw build will even top this?