On Friday, 22 December 2017 at 11:39:48 UTC, user1234 wrote:
If this ever happens, what will be published will have to be
based on LDC2.
If benchmarks based on DMD are published, the article will be
subject to the criticism that is that the shorter build time is
due to the optimization pass, since it's known not to be super
deep in DMD backend.
Sure, ldc is slower but not significantly so, and will still beat
the pants off clang, Rust, or Swift.
On Friday, 22 December 2017 at 11:46:49 UTC, Chris wrote:
D does not do itself any favors when it keeps accepting
mediocre results in benchmarks.
These are all runtime codegen benchmarks, whereas I was talking
about build speed.
https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/previews/round15/
Some years it does not complete the tests, in others it shows
results that are below mediocre.
Vibe.d ( and other D web frameworks ) benching twice slower
then scripting languages like PHP/Ruby. That does not advertise
D.
Sonke and others have noted that there are issues that need to be
worked out with that benchmark submission.
How about:
http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/
No D there? Performance must be bad because its not listed at
all ( for a language that exist 20 years )?
It was on there for many years but was tossed out by a subsequent
maintainer, who doesn't want it for some reason, as thedeemon
pointed out:
http://forum.dlang.org/post/lspybogtpqorauaus...@forum.dlang.org
Another one:
https://github.com/costajob/app-servers
Single threaded ( look at CPU total ), losing to other
languages again.
I think vibe.d is meant to be run in multiple process instances
instead, and it does second-best to Rust on a single core (maybe
beat out by Crystal too?), which is pretty good.
Impressions are everything when there is a wealth of languages
to pick from. Anybody stumbling over these results think: Well,
i am better going with Go, Rust, Crystal, ... for a web hosting
as they show more consistent high speed results.
I wouldn't say they're "everything," but they intrigue people
enough to dig deeper into the language or just to move on without
bothering. Of course, you may get great benchmarks with Rust but
once you try coding with it, you still may not like using it.
On Friday, 22 December 2017 at 14:48:22 UTC, thedeemon wrote:
On Friday, 22 December 2017 at 11:46:49 UTC, Chris wrote:
http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/
No D there? Performance must be bad because its not listed at
all ( for a language that exist 20 years )?
D is not there for the only reason of that benchmark maintainer
unwilling to include D. Technically you can take any C solution
there, translate it to D (mostly by renaming from .c to .d) and
with LDC get the same speed as C shows.
Better than C actually, if you use D libraries instead:
http://forum.dlang.org/post/olelrjiaiwdxhjhil...@forum.dlang.org
Getting back to the original topic of build speed, highlighting
that the dmd compiler itself now builds in seconds after the
C++->D translation would seem to be a layup:
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/oknuas$2lfp$1...@digitalmars.com
