On Tuesday, 6 August 2013 at 18:38:43 UTC, Kiith-Sa wrote:
On Tuesday, 6 August 2013 at 17:48:57 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 8/6/2013 5:13 AM, Richard Webb wrote:
It's possible that other library routines are causing some of
the remaining
difference from the MSVC build (e.g. the profiler suggests
that the DMC build
spends somewhat more time inside memcpy than the MSVC build).
Not sure if it's down to implementation or optimization
though - might be down
to intrinsics/inlining and such? (the proflie for the DMC
build says it's using
~1% of its time inside strlen and the profile for the MSVC
build doesn't mention
it at all, which i guess is because it's using an intrinsic
version).
If it's inlined then it won't show up in the profile. And yes,
it's possible MSVC has a faster memcpy(). After all, enormous
effort has been poured into memcpy().
If you use a profiler with line or instruction granularity
(like perf on Linux), it will show up. On Windows, that would
probably
be VTune and CodeAnalyst.
(obviously, as a part of the function it was inlined into,
but you'll get the time consumed at lines/instructions from the
inlined function)
