Hello Denis,

> On Mon, 01 Jun 2009 03:04:14 +0400, BCS <none@anon.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hello Denis,
>> 
>>> I wonder where ASM would be located :p
>>> 
>> top left.
>> 
> I highly doubt hand-written assembly for those tasks will be anywhere
> close to optimal.
> 
> I bet it would be in top right corner.
> 

There are only two cases where ASM should be used; 1) where you need access to specific op codes that the language doesn't expose and 2) where it needs to be faster than what you can otherwise get in any avalable languge. Based on that, you will never see it anywhere BUT the left edge. For that matter, if you aren't on the left edge, take whatever is and disassemble it and now you are.

"Denis Koroskin" <2korden@gmail.com> wrote in message news:op.uuthxivwo7cclz@soldat.creatstudio.intranet...
> On Mon, 01 Jun 2009 03:21:42 +0400, Tim Matthews <tim.matthews7@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Knud Soerensen wrote:
>>> Tim Matthews wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> It's things like this that make me want to get into visualization. Great article!
>>>>
>>>> Where's the D
>>>  It is on 3,3 called Dlang.
>>>
>>
>> OK it is was on the 05 chart but I was expecting it to be on the updated 09 chart though. They seem to believe D is less of a player now.
>
> IIRC, there was no stable 64bit D compiler for Linux at the moment they moved to new hardware and thus D support was dropped.

So they're benchmarks are only accurate for 64-bit?

Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Denis Koroskin" <2korden@gmail.com> wrote in message news:op.uuthxivwo7cclz@soldat.creatstudio.intranet...
>> On Mon, 01 Jun 2009 03:21:42 +0400, Tim Matthews <tim.matthews7@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Knud Soerensen wrote:
>>>> Tim Matthews wrote:
>>>>>> It's things like this that make me want to get into visualization. Great article!
>>>>> Where's the D
>>>>  It is on 3,3 called Dlang.
>>>>
>>> OK it is was on the 05 chart but I was expecting it to be on the updated 09 chart though. They seem to believe D is less of a player now.
>> IIRC, there was no stable 64bit D compiler for Linux at the moment they moved to new hardware and thus D support was dropped.
> 
> So they're benchmarks are only accurate for 64-bit?
> 
	The shootout have 32-bit and 64-bit versions of the benchmarks, but
they wanted to have the same benchmarks on both architectures. I
don't know which version was used to generate the charts though.

		Jerome
-- 
mailto:jeberger@free.fr
http://jeberger.free.fr
Jabber: jeberger@jabber.fr

Jérôme M. Berger wrote:
> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> "Denis Koroskin" <2korden@gmail.com> wrote in message news:op.uuthxivwo7cclz@soldat.creatstudio.intranet...
>>> On Mon, 01 Jun 2009 03:21:42 +0400, Tim Matthews <tim.matthews7@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Knud Soerensen wrote:
>>>>> Tim Matthews wrote:
>>>>>>> It's things like this that make me want to get into visualization.
>>>>>>> Great article!
>>>>>> Where's the D
>>>>>  It is on 3,3 called Dlang.
>>>>>
>>>> OK it is was on the 05 chart but I was expecting it to be on the updated
>>>> 09 chart though. They seem to believe D is less of a player now.
>>> IIRC, there was no stable 64bit D compiler for Linux at the moment they moved to new hardware and thus D support was dropped.
>>
>> So they're benchmarks are only accurate for 64-bit?
>     The shootout have 32-bit and 64-bit versions of the benchmarks, but they wanted to have the same benchmarks on both architectures. I don't know which version was used to generate the charts though.
> 
>         Jerome

Well now that LDC supports 64-bit, could we convince them to put it back in?

Robert Fraser wrote:
> Jérôme M. Berger wrote:
>> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>> "Denis Koroskin" <2korden@gmail.com> wrote in message news:op.uuthxivwo7cclz@soldat.creatstudio.intranet...
>>>> On Mon, 01 Jun 2009 03:21:42 +0400, Tim Matthews <tim.matthews7@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Knud Soerensen wrote:
>>>>>> Tim Matthews wrote:
>>>>>>>> It's things like this that make me want to get into visualization. Great article!
>>>>>>> Where's the D
>>>>>>  It is on 3,3 called Dlang.
>>>>>>
>>>>> OK it is was on the 05 chart but I was expecting it to be on the
>>>>> updated
>>>>> 09 chart though. They seem to believe D is less of a player now.
>>>> IIRC, there was no stable 64bit D compiler for Linux at the moment they moved to new hardware and thus D support was dropped.
>>>
>>> So they're benchmarks are only accurate for 64-bit?
>>     The shootout have 32-bit and 64-bit versions of the benchmarks,
>> but they wanted to have the same benchmarks on both architectures. I
>> don't know which version was used to generate the charts though.
>>
>>         Jerome
> 
> Well now that LDC supports 64-bit, could we convince them to put it back in?

 From the FAQ: "Why don't you include language X?"
================================8<-----------------------------------
     Is the language implementation

         * Used? There are way too many dead languages and unused
new languages - see The Language List and Computer Languages History
         * Interesting? Is there something significant and
interesting about the language, and will that be revealed by these
simple benchmark programs? (But look closely and you'll notice that
we sometimes include languages just because we find them interesting.)

     If that wasn't discouraging enough: in too many cases we've
been asked to include a language implementation, and been told that
of course programs would be contributed, but once the language
didn't seem to perform as-well-as hoped no more programs were
contributed. We're interested in the whole range of performance -
not just in the 5 programs which show a language implementation at
it's best.

     We have no ambition to measure every Python implementation or
every Haskell implementation or every C implementation - that's a
chore for all you Python enthusiasts and Haskell enthusiasts and C
enthusiasts, a chore which might be straightforward if you use our
measurement scripts.

     We are unable to publish measurements for many commercial
language implementations simply because their license conditions
forbid it.

     We will accept and reject languages in a capricious and unfair
fashion - so ask if we're interested before you start coding.
-------------------------------->8===================================
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64/faq.php#acceptable

	So we can always ask, but we have to be careful how we phrase it:
somebody asked about LLVM and LDC on the forums and the discussion
centred around LLVM as a C compiler:
https://alioth.debian.org/forum/forum.php?thread_id=14508&forum_id=999&group_id=30402

	Moreover, we have to be prepared to argue that D is used (should be
easy: just point at the number of projects on dsource) and
"interesting". The second is a lot more difficult because the
definition of "interesting" is subjective:
================================8<-----------------------------------
Yes, there are just too many languages.

Interesting means more like unusual -

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/ats.php http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=lisaac&lang2=gpp&box=1
-------------------------------->8===================================
https://alioth.debian.org/forum/message.php?msg_id=181473&group_id=30402

		Jerome
-- 
mailto:jeberger@free.fr
http://jeberger.free.fr
Jabber: jeberger@jabber.fr