Hello, I assume that DMD generates code for 386 and higher. Is this correct? If so, what processor will DMD optimize the code for if the -O option is invoked?

"Def" <Def_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:dtau3r$7i5$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Hello, I assume that DMD generates code for 386 and higher. Is this
> correct?
> If so, what processor will DMD optimize the code for if the -O option is
> invoked?

Pentium 6

Hi,

I was wondering the same thing. I assume you mean Pentium Pro. Am I right in thinking that this is the case for optimized and unoptimized code generation and that DMC does not emit SSE instructions?

In article <dtbb0k$ju7$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Walter Bright says...
>
>
>"Def" <Def_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:dtau3r$7i5$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>> Hello, I assume that DMD generates code for 386 and higher. Is this
>> correct?
>> If so, what processor will DMD optimize the code for if the -O option is
>> invoked?
>
>Pentium 6
>
>

Walter Bright wrote:
> "Def" <Def_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:dtau3r$7i5$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> 
>>Hello, I assume that DMD generates code for 386 and higher. Is this correct?
>>If so, what processor will DMD optimize the code for if the -O option is
>>invoked?
> 
> 
> Pentium 6 
> 
> 

I wonder if that was a joke, or not...if it was, it's funny. <g>
If not, what the hell is a Pentium 6? I guess a 686..?

Regards,
Alex

Hi,

I really wouldn't know, but don't count on it.. SSE instructions are useful is some very specific cases. I was surprised when I saw that Microsoft's VC8 compiler emits SSE instructions, but found out that the program (3D visualisation using OpenGL) ran slower with that feature turned on. SSE, as MMX and the other SSE's, is really meant to be written using inline assembly, when the programmer knows where to do batch operations on big arrays.

L.

"pmoore" <pmoore_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:dtccf9$1lh4$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Hi,
>
> I was wondering the same thing. I assume you mean Pentium Pro. Am I right
> in
> thinking that this is the case for optimized and unoptimized code
> generation and
> that DMC does not emit SSE instructions?
>
> In article <dtbb0k$ju7$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Walter Bright says...
>>
>>
>>"Def" <Def_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:dtau3r$7i5$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>>> Hello, I assume that DMD generates code for 386 and higher. Is this
>>> correct?
>>> If so, what processor will DMD optimize the code for if the -O option is
>>> invoked?
>>
>>Pentium 6
>>
>>
>
> 

"pmoore" <pmoore_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:dtccf9$1lh4$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> I was wondering the same thing. I assume you mean Pentium Pro. Am I right
> in
> thinking that this is the case for optimized and unoptimized code
> generation and
> that DMC does not emit SSE instructions?

That's right.

Thanks heaps for your answer so far, but still...:

In article <dtbb0k$ju7$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Walter Bright says...

>"Def" <Def_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:dtau3r$7i5$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>> Hello, I assume that DMD generates code for 386 and higher. Is this correct?

This question remains unanswered. I assume 386 and higher, but is it correct? It is important to mark my apps to the end user as "needs 386 or higher" or whatever.

>> If so, what processor will DMD optimize the code for if the -O option is invoked?
>
>Pentium 6

This is an unusual term, for me at least. If, for example, we refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_1 then which processor is the one you mean exactly?

Def

In article <dtf8t0$1uh4$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Def says...
>
>Thanks heaps for your answer so far, but still...:
>
>In article <dtbb0k$ju7$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Walter Bright says...
>
>>"Def" <Def_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:dtau3r$7i5$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>>> Hello, I assume that DMD generates code for 386 and higher. Is this correct?
>
>This question remains unanswered. I assume 386 and higher, but is it correct? It is important to mark my apps to the end user as "needs 386 or higher" or whatever.
>
>>> If so, what processor will DMD optimize the code for if the -O option is invoked?
>>
>>Pentium 6
>
>This is an unusual term, for me at least. If, for example, we refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_1 then which processor is the one you mean exactly?
>
>Def
>
>

Although I have no clue which CPU DMD optimizes for - it makes me think - would it be possible (sorry, don't mean to just invent features for walter to build here) to have some predefined versions that corespond to the cpu flags should there ever be any added?

AKA - if -OPentium4 is ever an option, than "version = Pentium4" or however walter would prefer to format it - that way our code could take the compilation perameters and do something usefull with it as well - like when using inline ASM to optimize for a CPU...

Anyhoo - just a thought.

Thanks,
Trevor Parscal

"Def" <Def_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:dtf8t0$1uh4$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> This question remains unanswered. I assume 386 and higher, but is it correct? It is important to mark my apps to the end user as "needs 386 or higher" or whatever.

Yes, it's 386 or higher.

>>> If so, what processor will DMD optimize the code for if the -O option is invoked?
>>
>>Pentium 6
>
> This is an unusual term, for me at least. If, for example, we refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_1 then which processor is the one you mean exactly?

Pentium Pro.

Walter, Does DMC actually emit any Pentium Pro instructions eg. CMOV, FCMOV? If not I would class it as 486 or higher as it definitely _does_ require a FPU.

In article <dtfpdh$2gih$2@digitaldaemon.com>, Walter Bright says...
>
>
>"Def" <Def_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:dtf8t0$1uh4$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>> This question remains unanswered. I assume 386 and higher, but is it correct? It is important to mark my apps to the end user as "needs 386 or higher" or whatever.
>
>Yes, it's 386 or higher.
>
>>>> If so, what processor will DMD optimize the code for if the -O option is invoked?
>>>
>>>Pentium 6
>>
>> This is an unusual term, for me at least. If, for example, we refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_1 then which processor is the one you mean exactly?
>
>Pentium Pro.
>
>