digitalmars.D - Increasing performance with static polymorphism (and other neat
- Atila Neves (4/4) Mar 31 2014 http://atilanevesoncode.wordpress.com/2014/03/31/increasing-performance-...
- bearophile (5/9) Mar 31 2014 There are updated LDC2 versions here:
- Atila Neves (7/16) Mar 31 2014 I figured, but I try not to have to compile my own binaries. I'm
- John Colvin (2/6) Mar 31 2014 What about -inline and -noboundscheck ?
- Atila Neves (4/13) Mar 31 2014 Good question. I forgot about those. I wish it was easier to do
- Atila Neves (4/18) Mar 31 2014 I updated the results. Using those two options brings dmd a lot
- Meta (2/6) Mar 31 2014 What's the title on Hackernews? I can't seem to find it.
- Meta (3/4) Mar 31 2014 Eh, nevermind, found it. Hackernews really needs a search
- Andrei Alexandrescu (4/7) Mar 31 2014 To search hackernews: https://hn.algolia.com. Here:
http://atilanevesoncode.wordpress.com/2014/03/31/increasing-performance-with-static-polymorphism-and-other-neat-tricks/ http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/21tszv/increasing_performance_with_static_polymorphism/ On hacker news as well, but we know how links to that go. Atila
Mar 31 2014
Atila Neves:http://atilanevesoncode.wordpress.com/2014/03/31/increasing-performance-with-static-polymorphism-and-other-neat-tricks/I left ldc out because its frontend (at least the package currently available on Arch Linux) is older and can’t compile the code,<There are updated LDC2 versions here: https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/releases/ Bye, bearophile
Mar 31 2014
I figured, but I try not to have to compile my own binaries. I'm running Arch Linux so I can get the new and shiny toys without having to! :P When it gets released and package I might add its numbers to the tables. Atila On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 15:04:20 UTC, bearophile wrote:Atila Neves:http://atilanevesoncode.wordpress.com/2014/03/31/increasing-performance-with-static-polymorphism-and-other-neat-tricks/I left ldc out because its frontend (at least the package currently available on Arch Linux) is older and can’t compile the code,<There are updated LDC2 versions here: https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/releases/ Bye, bearophile
Mar 31 2014
On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 14:00:28 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:http://atilanevesoncode.wordpress.com/2014/03/31/increasing-performance-with-static-polymorphism-and-other-neat-tricks/ http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/21tszv/increasing_performance_with_static_polymorphism/ On hacker news as well, but we know how links to that go. AtilaWhat about -inline and -noboundscheck ?
Mar 31 2014
Good question. I forgot about those. I wish it was easier to do release builds with dmd. Gonna try that out now. Atila On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 15:20:52 UTC, John Colvin wrote:On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 14:00:28 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:http://atilanevesoncode.wordpress.com/2014/03/31/increasing-performance-with-static-polymorphism-and-other-neat-tricks/ http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/21tszv/increasing_performance_with_static_polymorphism/ On hacker news as well, but we know how links to that go. AtilaWhat about -inline and -noboundscheck ?
Mar 31 2014
I updated the results. Using those two options brings dmd a lot closer to gdc and even surpasses it in one benchmark. Interesting. Atila On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 15:41:43 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:Good question. I forgot about those. I wish it was easier to do release builds with dmd. Gonna try that out now. Atila On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 15:20:52 UTC, John Colvin wrote:On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 14:00:28 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:http://atilanevesoncode.wordpress.com/2014/03/31/increasing-performance-with-static-polymorphism-and-other-neat-tricks/ http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/21tszv/increasing_performance_with_static_polymorphism/ On hacker news as well, but we know how links to that go. AtilaWhat about -inline and -noboundscheck ?
Mar 31 2014
On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 14:00:28 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:http://atilanevesoncode.wordpress.com/2014/03/31/increasing-performance-with-static-polymorphism-and-other-neat-tricks/ http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/21tszv/increasing_performance_with_static_polymorphism/ On hacker news as well, but we know how links to that go. AtilaWhat's the title on Hackernews? I can't seem to find it.
Mar 31 2014
On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 15:22:23 UTC, Meta wrote:What's the title on Hackernews? I can't seem to find it.Eh, nevermind, found it. Hackernews really needs a search function.
Mar 31 2014
On 03/31/2014 05:24 PM, Meta wrote:On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 15:22:23 UTC, Meta wrote:Perhaps we should start linking to this one instead? https://hn.algolia.com/#!/story/forever/0/Increasing%20performance%20with%20static%20polymorphism%20(and%20other%20neat%20tricks)What's the title on Hackernews? I can't seem to find it.Eh, nevermind, found it. Hackernews really needs a search function.
Mar 31 2014
On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 15:24:03 UTC, Meta wrote:On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 15:22:23 UTC, Meta wrote:What's the title on Hackernews? I can't seem to find it.Eh, nevermind, found it.Hackernews really needs a search function.Erm thats where I am coming from, the search feature is there at the bottom, take a look at the footer. I have a slightly tangential question, repeating what I asked on HN Can't the destructor issue of scopebuffer be mitigated by using hasElaborateDestructor( ) For instance have two versions one with a destructor for non POD and another without. The compiler dispatches to the appropriate one at compile time. There should not be any loss in performance.
Mar 31 2014
On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 23:57:09 UTC, srean wrote:On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 15:24:03 UTC, Meta wrote:Ah, you're right. That could definitely be better placed... I generally read the Hackernews RSS feed, not the site itself, so I'm not well-accustomed to the actual site.On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 15:22:23 UTC, Meta wrote:What's the title on Hackernews? I can't seem to find it.Eh, nevermind, found it.Hackernews really needs a search function.Erm thats where I am coming from, the search feature is there at the bottom, take a look at the footer. I have a slightly tangential question, repeating what I asked on HN Can't the destructor issue of scopebuffer be mitigated by using hasElaborateDestructor( ) For instance have two versions one with a destructor for non POD and another without. The compiler dispatches to the appropriate one at compile time. There should not be any loss in performance.
Mar 31 2014
Not a question to you in particular, but dont know how to add to a thread without replying. I am very curious about the following (I think by the time I had clarified my question Walter had left the building)I have a slightly tangential question, repeating what I asked on HN Can't the destructor issue of scopebuffer be mitigated by using hasElaborateDestructor( ) For instance have two versions one with a destructor for non POD and another without. The compiler dispatches to the appropriate one at compile time. There should not be any loss in performance.
Apr 01 2014
On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 23:57:09 UTC, srean wrote:Can't the destructor issue of scopebuffer be mitigated by using hasElaborateDestructor( ) For instance have two versions one with a destructor for non POD and another without. The compiler dispatches to the appropriate one at compile time. There should not be any loss in performance.Andrei suggested something similar on github a couple weeks ago: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/2014#issuecomment-37947056
Apr 01 2014
On 3/31/14, 7:00 AM, Atila Neves wrote:http://atilanevesoncode.wordpress.com/2014/03/31/increasing-performance-with-static-polymorphism-and-other-neat-tricks/ http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/21tszv/increasing_performance_with_static_polymorphism/ On hacker news as well, but we know how links to that go.To search hackernews: https://hn.algolia.com. Here: https://hn.algolia.com/#!/story/forever/prefix/0/static%20polymorphis Andrei
Mar 31 2014