On 10/06/2011 21:18, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On 2011-06-10 13:15, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"Robert Clipsham"<rob...@octarineparrot.com> wrote in message
news:ist1af$tbj$1...@digitalmars.com...
As for how well they optimize code, dmd has a state of the art optimizer
from the 90s, or there abouts - the code it generates is pretty speedy,
it has some obvious short comings though (I believe floating point and
inlining are lacking, as well as some more modern optimizations).
I'm pretty sure DMD does inlining. After all, it *does* have an "-inline"
commandlne flag. My understanding is that it just doesn't always inline
everything it could.
dmd _definitely_ has inlining. It could use some improvement (e.g. functions
with lazy parameters can't currently be inlined), but it _does_ have inlining.
And dmd's optimizations aren't bad. It's just that they could be better. I
expect that we'll see them improve further once the language has stablized
more. As much as faster code would be nice, correct code is much more
important. And there are still plenty of bugs to iron out in the compiler
(though it's definitely improving).
- Jonathan M Davis
Indeed, by lacking I didn't mean lacking the feature, I meant lacking in
functionality/ability, there are a lot of things that it could inline
but doesn't currently.
--
Robert
http://octarineparrot.com/
