On Saturday, 30 May 2015 at 14:29:56 UTC, ketmar wrote:
On Sat, 30 May 2015 12:00:57 +0000, Kyoji Klyden wrote:
So personally I vote that speed optimizations on DMD are a
waste of time
at the moment.
it's not only waste of time, it's unrealistic to make DMD
backend's
quality comparable to GDC/LDC. it will require complete rewrite
of backend
and many man-years of work. and GDC/LDC will not simply sit
frozen all
this time.
+1 for LDC as first class!
D would become a lot more appealing if it could take advantage of
the LLVM tooling already available!
Regarding the speed problem - One could always have LDC have a
nitro switch, where it simply runs less of the expensive passes,
thus reducing the codegen quality, but improving speed. Would
that work? I'm assuming the "slowness" in LLVM comes from the
optimization passes.
Would clang's thread-sanitizer and address-sanitizer be adaptable
and usable with D as well?
