• digited <digited yandex.ru> Oct 23 2008
• "Bill Baxter" <wbaxter gmail.com> Oct 23 2008
• digited <digited yandex.ru> Oct 23 2008
• torhu <no spam.invalid> Oct 23 2008
• digited <digited yandex.ru> Oct 23 2008
• torhu <no spam.invalid> Oct 24 2008

digited <digited yandex.ru> writes:

Walter Bright Wrote:

 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.036.zip
 


Great!

I failed to compile Tango svn trunk with 1.036, but Tango 0.99.7, compiled with
1.035, works fine.

I got a small fps boost when compiled my graphics engine with new dmd - maybe
some improvements in associative arrays operations?.. Fps stability also
improved.

When I was compiling DWT with 1.035 in a single command to dmd (dmd -lib
modules), it took 11.66 seconds on 2GHz processor, size of lib was 7.6MB. With
1.036 it took 16.74 seconds and lib size became 8.1. I get same results with
"-lib" while compiling derelict opengl and glu - it now takes a bit longer and
produces bigger libs. Have you changed something?

"Bill Baxter" <wbaxter gmail.com> writes:

On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 1:59 AM, digited <digited yandex.ru> wrote:
 Walter Bright Wrote:

 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
 http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.036.zip


 Great!

 I failed to compile Tango svn trunk with 1.036, but Tango 0.99.7, compiled
with 1.035, works fine.

 I got a small fps boost when compiled my graphics engine with new dmd - maybe
some improvements in associative arrays operations?.. Fps stability also
improved.

 When I was compiling DWT with 1.035 in a single command to dmd (dmd -lib
modules), it took 11.66 seconds on 2GHz processor, size of lib was 7.6MB. With
1.036 it took 16.74 seconds and lib size became 8.1. I get same results with
"-lib" while compiling derelict opengl and glu - it now takes a bit longer and
produces bigger libs. Have you changed something?


I have no idea why the generated code got bigger again, but it's far
from being the first time.
Check the graph here:
http://www.billbaxter.com/techblog/?p=9


--bb

digited <digited yandex.ru> writes:

Bill Baxter Wrote:
 
 I have no idea why the generated code got bigger again, but it's far
 from being the first time.
 Check the graph here:
 http://www.billbaxter.com/techblog/?p=9
 
 
 --bb


I thought this bug was a feature... Back to 1.035 then.

torhu <no spam.invalid> writes:

digited wrote:
...
 When I was compiling DWT with 1.035 in a single command to dmd (dmd -lib
modules), it took 11.66 seconds on 2GHz processor, size of lib was 7.6MB. With
1.036 it took 16.74 seconds and lib size became 8.1. I get same results with
"-lib" while compiling derelict opengl and glu - it now takes a bit longer and
produces bigger libs. Have you changed something?
 
 


I tried building DWT with -lib when that feature was first added.  -lib 
seems to be broken somehow, because just compiling one file at a time 
results in a much smaller .lib file.

digited <digited yandex.ru> writes:

torhu Wrote:

 
 I tried building DWT with -lib when that feature was first added.  -lib 
 seems to be broken somehow, because just compiling one file at a time 
 results in a much smaller .lib file.


That's normal (really a feature, not a bug) - "-lib" creates more than one
object file from a module to make executables smaller (by linking not the full
module object file, but it's piece that the executable really needs), it also
does not any IO with hdd, all compiling and linking in RAM, so creating static
libs is extremely fast and doesn't produce object files as output.

I've just compared "-lib" results from 1.035 and 1.036, it now works
differently.

torhu <no spam.invalid> writes:

digited wrote:
 torhu Wrote:
 
 
 I tried building DWT with -lib when that feature was first added.  -lib 
 seems to be broken somehow, because just compiling one file at a time 
 results in a much smaller .lib file.


 That's normal (really a feature, not a bug) - "-lib" creates more than one
object file from a module to make executables smaller (by linking not the full
module object file, but it's piece that the executable really needs), it also
does not any IO with hdd, all compiling and linking in RAM, so creating static
libs is extremely fast and doesn't produce object files as output.
 
 I've just compared "-lib" results from 1.035 and 1.036, it now works
differently.


Sorry, what I meant to say was that the executable ends up bigger when 
using libs created with -lib.