www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - The Computer Languages Shootout Game

reply Russel Winder <russel russel.org.uk> writes:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The game is known to be fundamentally flawed, but despite this, the
results have effect on the perception of programming languages.

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

D should compete with C, C++ and beat Go.  If anyone has any time
perhaps a "cabal" should form to create a Bazaar/Mercurial/Git
repository with the various codes in it?

--=20
Russel.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n=
et
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel russel.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder
Oct 31 2010
next sibling parent reply bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:
Russel Winder:

 The game is known to be fundamentally flawed,

It has flaws, but if you try to create something better you will probably create something far worse.
 If anyone has any time
 perhaps a "cabal" should form to create a Bazaar/Mercurial/Git
 repository with the various codes in it?

This is a starting point: http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/debian/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=gdc&lang2=dlang I also have some improved implementations. Bye, bearophile
Oct 31 2010
parent dsimcha <dsimcha yahoo.com> writes:
== Quote from bearophile (bearophileHUGS lycos.com)'s article
 Russel Winder:
 The game is known to be fundamentally flawed,


Agreed. People need to appreciate the difference between "noisy" and "completely worthless". Maybe it's easier for me than for most people because I work with statistics and noisy data on a daily basis. The Language Benchmark Game is noisy. This means that you can't tell at a fine-grained resolution which language is fastest, and small differences are almost meaningless. It is not completely worthless, though. If it shows a difference of several fold, you can be pretty sure that's real. I see no problem with it as long as everyone understands that it's noisy and that small differences are to be taken with a grain of salt.
Oct 31 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
Russel Winder wrote:
 The game is known to be fundamentally flawed, but despite this, the
 results have effect on the perception of programming languages.
 
 http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/
 
 D should compete with C, C++ and beat Go.  If anyone has any time
 perhaps a "cabal" should form to create a Bazaar/Mercurial/Git
 repository with the various codes in it?

The thing about that shootout is D used to be on there, until the maintainer of the site removed it. He refuses to include D on the benchmarks.
Oct 31 2010
next sibling parent reply Eric Poggel <dnewsgroup2 yage3d.net> writes:
On 10/31/2010 5:13 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
 Russel Winder wrote:
 The game is known to be fundamentally flawed, but despite this, the
 results have effect on the perception of programming languages.

 http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

 D should compete with C, C++ and beat Go. If anyone has any time
 perhaps a "cabal" should form to create a Bazaar/Mercurial/Git
 repository with the various codes in it?

The thing about that shootout is D used to be on there, until the maintainer of the site removed it. He refuses to include D on the benchmarks.

Is it excluded for lack for 64-bit support. What can we do to get it back on there?
Oct 31 2010
parent bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:
Eric Poggel:

 Is it excluded for lack for 64-bit support.

Before being sure of this you have to receive an answer from that person. D was removed maybe for the lack of a 64 bit implementation, but also because that site author has reduced the amount of work needed to manage the site, reducing the number of benchmarks and languages. Many D programs were very C-looking (because they were designed to be fast if compiled with DMD), and that site owner has always desired to show a high diversity in the language solutions, and remove the very similar languages where possible. Bye, bearophile
Oct 31 2010
prev sibling parent reply dsimcha <dsimcha yahoo.com> writes:
== Quote from Walter Bright (newshound2 digitalmars.com)'s article
 Russel Winder wrote:
 The game is known to be fundamentally flawed, but despite this, the
 results have effect on the perception of programming languages.

 http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

 D should compete with C, C++ and beat Go.  If anyone has any time
 perhaps a "cabal" should form to create a Bazaar/Mercurial/Git
 repository with the various codes in it?

the site removed it. He refuses to include D on the benchmarks.

Has he given a reason? IIRC it's because D isn't/wasn't included in the package repos of the distributions he uses. This will probably get fixed soon: Fedora already includes LDC. GDC is now up to date (or at most one version behind) for D1 and is rapidly catching up for D2. Unfortunately, the Linux world is dominated by FOSS zealots for whom DMD isn't open enough. In the ideal world the DMD backend would be under an OSI-approved license so that it could be distributed by even the most zealously pro-FOSS distributions.
Oct 31 2010
parent reply Lutger <lutger.blijdestijn gmail.com> writes:
dsimcha wrote:

 == Quote from Walter Bright (newshound2 digitalmars.com)'s article
 Russel Winder wrote:
 The game is known to be fundamentally flawed, but despite this, the
 results have effect on the perception of programming languages.

 http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

 D should compete with C, C++ and beat Go.  If anyone has any time
 perhaps a "cabal" should form to create a Bazaar/Mercurial/Git
 repository with the various codes in it?

maintainer of the site removed it. He refuses to include D on the benchmarks.

Has he given a reason? IIRC it's because D isn't/wasn't included in the package repos of the distributions he uses. This will probably get fixed soon: Fedora already includes LDC. GDC is now up to date (or at most one version behind) for D1 and is rapidly catching up for D2. Unfortunately, the Linux world is dominated by FOSS zealots for whom DMD isn't open enough. In the ideal world the DMD backend would be under an OSI-approved license so that it could be distributed by even the most zealously pro-FOSS distributions.

Of which there are very few. A linux distro or community repository cannot distribute dmd at all, it is prohibited by the license. This is primarily a practical issue, not an ideological one.
Oct 31 2010
next sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
Lutger wrote:
 A linux distro or community repository cannot 
 distribute dmd at all, it is prohibited by the license. This is primarily a 
 practical issue, not an ideological one.

And any one who has bothered to ask me, I have given permission to include it.
Oct 31 2010
next sibling parent reply Eric Poggel <dnewsgroup2 yage3d.net> writes:
On 10/31/2010 7:25 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
 Lutger wrote:
 A linux distro or community repository cannot distribute dmd at all,
 it is prohibited by the license. This is primarily a practical issue,
 not an ideological one.

And any one who has bothered to ask me, I have given permission to include it.

I think a lot of people have the "If you have to ask, the answer is no" mentality. Maybe if distribution rights were codified in the license then there would be less apprehension about it. It's your code, and you have the right do do with it as you please, but would you be willing add distribution rights to the license?
Nov 01 2010
parent Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 11/1/10 11:47 AM, Eric Poggel wrote:
 On 10/31/2010 7:25 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
 Lutger wrote:
 A linux distro or community repository cannot distribute dmd at all,
 it is prohibited by the license. This is primarily a practical issue,
 not an ideological one.

And any one who has bothered to ask me, I have given permission to include it.

I think a lot of people have the "If you have to ask, the answer is no" mentality. Maybe if distribution rights were codified in the license then there would be less apprehension about it. It's your code, and you have the right do do with it as you please, but would you be willing add distribution rights to the license?

I agree. Unmentioned availability of per-case customized licensing terms is very rare in the industry. Andrei
Nov 01 2010
prev sibling parent Lutger <lutger.blijdestijn gmail.com> writes:
Walter Bright wrote:

 Lutger wrote:
 A linux distro or community repository cannot
 distribute dmd at all, it is prohibited by the license. This is
 primarily a practical issue, not an ideological one.

And any one who has bothered to ask me, I have given permission to include it.

That's great. I guess the community (me included) could take more advantage of that. For most distro's it is not an option though, and even if they do it, it's for something their users really want. I'm not taking a position here, just saying that this is an issue in adoption.
Nov 01 2010
prev sibling parent reply =?UTF-8?B?IkrDqXLDtG1lIE0uIEJlcmdlciI=?= <jeberger free.fr> writes:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Diego Cano Lagneaux wrote:
 Of which there are very few. A linux distro or community repository
 cannot distribute dmd at all, it is prohibited by the license. This i=



 primarily a practical issue, not an ideological one.

Right.. I forgot the issue is also practical. If DigitalMars doesn't allow redistribution, they simply cannot include it even if they wante=



seem so impossible as you say.

Are you sure? Here, "yaourt -Ss dmd" only show results from AUR (which means that they download from DigitalMars anyway) Jerome --=20 mailto:jeberger free.fr http://jeberger.free.fr Jabber: jeberger jabber.fr
Nov 03 2010
parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
== Quote from Diego Cano Lagneaux (d.cano.lagneaux gmail.com)'s article
 En Wed, 03 Nov 2010 21:36:10 +0100, J=C3=A9r=C3=B4me M. Berger <jeberger=
  free.fr>  =
 escribi=C3=B3:
 Diego Cano Lagneaux wrote:
 Of which there are very few. A linux distro or community repository=
 cannot distribute dmd at all, it is prohibited by the license. This=




 primarily a practical issue, not an ideological one.

Right.. I forgot the issue is also practical. If DigitalMars doesn't= allow redistribution, they simply cannot include it even if they = wanted.

seem so impossible as you say.

Are you sure? Here, "yaourt -Ss dmd" only show results from AUR (which means that they download from DigitalMars anyway) Jerome

~> pacman -Ss dmd community/dmd 1.058-1 The Digital Mars D compiler.

Flashplayer is distributed via installing a "download, unpack and install" script on systems. There's nothing stopping vendors from using the same technique for DMD. Iain
Nov 04 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent retard <re tard.com.invalid> writes:
Sun, 31 Oct 2010 21:45:56 +0000, dsimcha wrote:

 Unfortunately, the Linux world is dominated by FOSS zealots for whom DMD
 isn't open enough.  In the ideal world the DMD backend would be under an
 OSI-approved license so that it could be distributed by even the most
 zealously pro-FOSS distributions.

The Linux world isn't dominated by a single homogenous group called the 'FOSS zealots'. There are as many ideological views as you can imagine. First, there's an ideological mismatch between 'free' and 'open' (it's the ESR vs RMS issue). ESR believes in right wing politics, RMS is a left wing fundamentalist. Some distros include non-free packages if they have the distribution rights. Some distros even provide commercial packages (http://www.fluendo.com/shop/product/fluendo-mp3-decoder/, http:// www.transgaming.com/ etc.) For example the language shootout author uses Debian derived distributions. They don't include non-OSI aproved software in the community repositories. It's simple as that. http://www.opensource.org/ docs/osd - provide an OSI aproved license + 32 & 64-bit backends for x86.
Oct 31 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent retard <re tard.com.invalid> writes:
Sun, 31 Oct 2010 23:10:02 +0100, Lutger wrote:

 dsimcha wrote:
 
 == Quote from Walter Bright (newshound2 digitalmars.com)'s article
 Russel Winder wrote:
 The game is known to be fundamentally flawed, but despite this, the
 results have effect on the perception of programming languages.

 http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

 D should compete with C, C++ and beat Go.  If anyone has any time
 perhaps a "cabal" should form to create a Bazaar/Mercurial/Git
 repository with the various codes in it?

maintainer of the site removed it. He refuses to include D on the benchmarks.

Has he given a reason? IIRC it's because D isn't/wasn't included in the package repos of the distributions he uses. This will probably get fixed soon: Fedora already includes LDC. GDC is now up to date (or at most one version behind) for D1 and is rapidly catching up for D2. Unfortunately, the Linux world is dominated by FOSS zealots for whom DMD isn't open enough. In the ideal world the DMD backend would be under an OSI-approved license so that it could be distributed by even the most zealously pro-FOSS distributions.

Of which there are very few. A linux distro or community repository cannot distribute dmd at all, it is prohibited by the license. This is primarily a practical issue, not an ideological one.

Right.. I forgot the issue is also practical. If DigitalMars doesn't allow redistribution, they simply cannot include it even if they wanted. E.g. Canonical provides non-free software via some kind of partner programme. It's possible to easily install non-free applications ( http:// archive.canonical.com/ubuntu/pool/partner/ ). My guess is, they don't come and kneel before the Great DigitalMars. You need to actively offer your software to them.
Oct 31 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent "Diego Cano Lagneaux" <d.cano.lagneaux gmail.com> writes:
 Of which there are very few. A linux distro or community repository
 cannot distribute dmd at all, it is prohibited by the license. This is
 primarily a practical issue, not an ideological one.

Right.. I forgot the issue is also practical. If DigitalMars doesn't allow redistribution, they simply cannot include it even if they wanted.

so impossible as you say.
Nov 01 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent Gour <gour atmarama.net> writes:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, 01 Nov 2010 11:19:08 +0100
 "Diego" =3D=3D "Diego Cano Lagneaux" wrote:






Diego> ArchLinux includes dmd (version 1) in its community repo. It Diego> does not seem so impossible as you say. Don't forget about dmd2 in AUR. ;) (http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?O=3D0&K=3Ddmd2&do_Search=3DGo) --=20 Gour | Hlapicina, Croatia | GPG key: CDBF17CA ----------------------------------------------------------------
Nov 01 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent retard <re tard.com.invalid> writes:
Mon, 01 Nov 2010 11:19:08 +0100, Diego Cano Lagneaux wrote:


 Of which there are very few. A linux distro or community repository
 cannot distribute dmd at all, it is prohibited by the license. This is
 primarily a practical issue, not an ideological one.

Right.. I forgot the issue is also practical. If DigitalMars doesn't allow redistribution, they simply cannot include it even if they wanted.

seem so impossible as you say.

I didn't say it seems so impossible. The sentence starts with the word IF. That's exactly what the prohibition of redistribution means. It's a fact, it's not an opinion. You don't need belief. The ArchLinux developers have either made a deal with DigitalMars or they only provide a download script that fetches the binaries from the DigitalMars site. However this is not something they would allow in the standard core packages. Otherwise they couldn't provide any installers or live CD/DVD distributions.
Nov 01 2010
prev sibling parent "Diego Cano Lagneaux" <d.cano.lagneaux gmail.com> writes:
En Wed, 03 Nov 2010 21:36:10 +0100, J=C3=A9r=C3=B4me M. Berger <jeberger=
 free.fr>  =

escribi=C3=B3:

 Diego Cano Lagneaux wrote:
 Of which there are very few. A linux distro or community repository=




 cannot distribute dmd at all, it is prohibited by the license. This=




 primarily a practical issue, not an ideological one.

Right.. I forgot the issue is also practical. If DigitalMars doesn't=



 allow redistribution, they simply cannot include it even if they  =



 wanted.



 seem so impossible as you say.

Are you sure? Here, "yaourt -Ss dmd" only show results from AUR (which means that they download from DigitalMars anyway) Jerome

Using pacman to avoid AUR results: ~> pacman -Ss dmd community/dmd 1.058-1 The Digital Mars D compiler. Using packer, to see the AUR: ~> packer -Ss dmd community/dmd 1.058-1 The Digital Mars D compiler. aur/gdc 0.24-1 GDC, Digital Mars D Programing Language (DMD) frontend for GCC aur/gdc-svn 243-3 GDC, Digital Mars D Programing Language (DMD) frontend for GCC aur/gdc-bin 0.24-3 GDC, Digital Mars D Programing Language (DMD) frontend for GCC aur/dmd2 2.050-1 The Digital Mars D compiler (D2 version) aur/dmd2-complete 2.050-2 The Digital Mars D compiler & Standard Library (D2 version) aur/dmd2-bin 2.050-1 The Digital Mars D compiler (D2 version) aur/dmd2-complete-bin 2.049-1 The Digital Mars D compiler & Standard Library (D2 version) aur/gdc1-hg 304-1 GDC, Digital Mars D Programing Language (DMD) frontend for GCC (D1 = = version) aur/gdc2-hg 304-1 GDC, Digital Mars D Programing Language (DMD) frontend for GCC (D2 = = version)
Nov 04 2010