LDC 0.12.0, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download! It is built on the 2.063.2 frontend and standard library and supports LLVM 3.1-3.3 (OS X: 3.2 only).

As usual, you can find links to the changelog and the binary packages over at digitalmars.D.ldc: http://forum.dlang.org/post/mailman.2418.1382481165.1719.digitalmars-d-ldc@puremagic.com

Also, while it is not yet clear when the final DMD 2.064 release will come out, work on integrating it into LDC has already begun, so stay tuned for the next release.

Cheers,
David

On Tuesday, 22 October 2013 at 22:42:14 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:
> LDC 0.12.0, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download! It is built on the 2.063.2 frontend and standard library and supports LLVM 3.1-3.3 (OS X: 3.2 only).
>
> As usual, you can find links to the changelog and the binary packages over at digitalmars.D.ldc: http://forum.dlang.org/post/mailman.2418.1382481165.1719.digitalmars-d-ldc@puremagic.com
>
> Also, while it is not yet clear when the final DMD 2.064 release will come out, work on integrating it into LDC has already begun, so stay tuned for the next release.
>
> Cheers,
> David

Awesome !

On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 00:42:13 +0200, David Nadlinger wrote:

> LDC 0.12.0, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download!
> It is built on the 2.063.2 frontend and standard library and supports
> LLVM 3.1-3.3 (OS X: 3.2 only).
> 
> As usual, you can find links to the changelog and the binary packages over at digitalmars.D.ldc: http://forum.dlang.org/post/mailman.2418.1382481165.1719.digitalmars-d-
ldc@puremagic.com
> 
> Also, while it is not yet clear when the final DMD 2.064 release will
> come out, work on integrating it into LDC has already begun,
> so stay tuned for the next release.
> 
> Cheers,
> David

Congratulations! :-)

Arch Linux package updated.

On Wednesday, 23 October 2013 at 12:17:56 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> Arch Linux package updated.

Awesome, that was quick!

Thanks,
David

On 10/22/2013 06:42 PM, David Nadlinger wrote:
> LDC 0.12.0, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download!

Congratulations!

I am a D enthusiast who reads more *about* D than actually learning the language! ;)

I have a question about LLVM.
When it comes to performance, do all LLVM-based languages eventually match each other in speed for any given task, no matter it is Clang or D?

I guess having or not having a GC (or different implementations of it in different languages) will make a difference, but if we exclude GC, will they be generating the same exact code for any given operation?

In other words, though two different languages are based on LLVM, can one of its binary exceed the other in speed?

Thanks.

On Wednesday, 23 October 2013 at 17:45:50 UTC, John Joyus wrote:
> On 10/22/2013 06:42 PM, David Nadlinger wrote:
>> LDC 0.12.0, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download!
>
> Congratulations!
>
> I am a D enthusiast who reads more *about* D than actually learning the language! ;)
>
> I have a question about LLVM.
> When it comes to performance, do all LLVM-based languages eventually match each other in speed for any given task, no matter it is Clang or D?
>
> I guess having or not having a GC (or different implementations of it in different languages) will make a difference, but if we exclude GC, will they be generating the same exact code for any given operation?

It depends. If 2 language frontends generate the same IR then LLVM generates the same exact code. But in general you have different languages features therefore the IR differs, too. (C++ classes are not available in C, C++ multiple inheritance in not available in D, D slices are not available in C++, ...)

If the generated IR is too "stupid" then even the LLVM optimizer can't help (e.g. look at the now solved issue #119 https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/issues/119).

And a functional language like Haskell is likely to generate totally different IR.

>
> In other words, though two different languages are based on LLVM, can one of its binary exceed the other in speed?

Yes.

> Thanks.

Regards
Kai

On Tuesday, 22 October 2013 at 22:42:14 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:
> LDC 0.12.0, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download! It is built on the 2.063.2 frontend and standard library and supports LLVM 3.1-3.3 (OS X: 3.2 only).

Congratulations David and team :-)

On 10/23/2013 02:26 PM, Kai Nacke wrote:
> On Wednesday, 23 October 2013 at 17:45:50 UTC, John Joyus wrote:
>> On 10/22/2013 06:42 PM, David Nadlinger wrote:
>>> LDC 0.12.0, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download!
>>
>> Congratulations!
>>
>> I am a D enthusiast who reads more *about* D than actually learning
>> the language! ;)
>>
>> I have a question about LLVM.
>> When it comes to performance, do all LLVM-based languages eventually
>> match each other in speed for any given task, no matter it is Clang or D?
>>
>> I guess having or not having a GC (or different implementations of it
>> in different languages) will make a difference, but if we exclude GC,
>> will they be generating the same exact code for any given operation?
>
> It depends. If 2 language frontends generate the same IR then LLVM
> generates the same exact code. But in general you have different
> languages features therefore the IR differs, too. (C++ classes are not
> available in C, C++ multiple inheritance in not available in D, D slices
> are not available in C++, ...)
>
> If the generated IR is too "stupid" then even the LLVM optimizer can't
> help (e.g. look at the now solved issue #119
> https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/issues/119).
>
> And a functional language like Haskell is likely to generate totally
> different IR.
>
>>
>> In other words, though two different languages are based on LLVM, can
>> one of its binary exceed the other in speed?
>
> Yes.
>

Thanks Kai,
It's good to know that "smart" developers can develop better compilers with the same IR available to all.

On Wednesday, 23 October 2013 at 17:45:50 UTC, John Joyus wrote:
> On 10/22/2013 06:42 PM, David Nadlinger wrote:
>> LDC 0.12.0, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download!
>
> Congratulations!
>
> I am a D enthusiast who reads more *about* D than actually learning the language! ;)
>
> I have a question about LLVM.
> When it comes to performance, do all LLVM-based languages eventually match each other in speed for any given task, no matter it is Clang or D?
>
> I guess having or not having a GC (or different implementations of it in different languages) will make a difference, but if we exclude GC, will they be generating the same exact code for any given operation?
>
> In other words, though two different languages are based on LLVM, can one of its binary exceed the other in speed?
>
> Thanks.

It depends.
Two benchmarks of different languages and compilers:
http://togototo.wordpress.com/2013/07/23/benchmarking-level-generation-go-rust-haskell-and-d/
http://togototo.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/benchmarks-round-two-parallel-go-rust-d-scala-and-nimrod/

I think it's answer for your question. For example, Clang (LLVM C) is fastest, LDC (LLVM D) has 2-nd place, but LLVM-GHC (LLVM Haskell) ~ 2 times slower.