www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Suggestion: Build windows DMD with MSVC

reply Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:
--001a11c30946e9520804de0c0678
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Building DMD with MSVC results in a compiler that runs MUCH MUCH faster.
In the interest of making DMD releases as fast as possible, this should be
standardised.

--001a11c30946e9520804de0c0678
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8

<div dir="ltr">Building DMD with MSVC results in a compiler that runs MUCH MUCH
faster.<div style>In the interest of making DMD releases as fast as possible,
this should be standardised.</div></div>

--001a11c30946e9520804de0c0678--
May 31 2013
next sibling parent "bearophile" <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:
Manu:

 Building DMD with MSVC results in a compiler that runs MUCH 
 MUCH faster.
 In the interest of making DMD releases as fast as possible, 
 this should be
 standardised.

How much faster? And how much time does it take to compile DMD itself? I compile DMD almost every day, so I am interested in keeping this time quite low. (On Windows I use G++ v.4.8, isn't it good enough to compile DMD, instead of MSVC?) Bye, bearophile
May 31 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Joseph Rushton Wakeling" <joseph.wakeling webdrake.net> writes:
On Friday, 31 May 2013 at 23:32:36 UTC, Manu wrote:
 Building DMD with MSVC results in a compiler that runs MUCH 
 MUCH faster.

... Numbers? Purely out of academic curiosity, as I'm a GNU/Linux user :-)
May 31 2013
parent Benjamin Thaut <code benjamin-thaut.de> writes:
Am 01.06.2013 04:13, schrieb Joseph Rushton Wakeling:
 On Friday, 31 May 2013 at 23:32:36 UTC, Manu wrote:
 Building DMD with MSVC results in a compiler that runs MUCH MUCH faster.

... Numbers? Purely out of academic curiosity, as I'm a GNU/Linux user :-)

I haved measured it exactly but its alt least twice as fast.
Jun 01 2013
prev sibling parent Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:
--047d7b47249e35140104de0e4ff3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 1 June 2013 12:02, bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> wrote:

 Manu:


  Building DMD with MSVC results in a compiler that runs MUCH MUCH faster.
 In the interest of making DMD releases as fast as possible, this should be
 standardised.

How much faster? And how much time does it take to compile DMD itself? I compile DMD almost every day, so I am interested in keeping this time quite low. (On Windows I use G++ v.4.8, isn't it good enough to compile DMD, instead of MSVC?)

Are the releases not built with DMC? Last time I tried to build DMD, it was configured to use DMC by default. I'm sure GCC would also be fine. --047d7b47249e35140104de0e4ff3 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 <div dir="ltr">On 1 June 2013 12:02, bearophile <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:bearophileHUGS lycos.com" target="_blank">bearophileHUGS lycos.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Manu:<div class="im"><br> <br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> Building DMD with MSVC results in a compiler that runs MUCH MUCH faster.<br> In the interest of making DMD releases as fast as possible, this should be<br> standardised.<br> </blockquote> <br></div> How much faster?<br> And how much time does it take to compile DMD itself? I compile DMD almost every day, so I am interested in keeping this time quite low.<br> <br> (On Windows I use G++ v.4.8, isn&#39;t it good enough to compile DMD, instead of MSVC?)<br></blockquote><div style><br></div><div style>Are the releases not built with DMC? Last time I tried to build DMD, it was configured to use DMC by default.</div> <div style>I&#39;m sure GCC would also be fine.</div></div></div></div> --047d7b47249e35140104de0e4ff3--
May 31 2013