Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2014-12-20 Thread MattCoder via Digitalmars-d
On Saturday, 20 December 2014 at 21:47:24 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/2pvf68/armv7_vs_x8664_pathfinding_benchmark_of_c_d_go/ Please take a look at this and ensure that the benchmark code is using D correctly... There is already a topic about this: h

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2014-12-20 Thread bearophile via Digitalmars-d
MattCoder: There is already a topic about this: http://forum.dlang.org/thread/agevpeanzbpbtcjgx...@forum.dlang.org Matheus. And perhaps even a bug report of mine: http://forum.dlang.org/thread/zpjjzbkwlisjemoxu...@forum.dlang.org?page=5#post-izyhysusezbidhqdncan:40forum.dlang.org Bye, bearo

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2014-12-20 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
On 12/20/2014 2:39 PM, bearophile wrote: MattCoder: There is already a topic about this: http://forum.dlang.org/thread/agevpeanzbpbtcjgx...@forum.dlang.org Matheus. And perhaps even a bug report of mine: http://forum.dlang.org/thread/zpjjzbkwlisjemoxu...@forum.dlang.org?page=5#post-izyhysus

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2014-12-20 Thread bearophile via Digitalmars-d
Walter Bright: Bug reports go into bugzilla. Reporting them in the n.g. means they'll likely get ignored. I'll take care of not letting it get ignored :-) Bye, bearophile

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2014-12-21 Thread Dicebot via Digitalmars-d
On Saturday, 20 December 2014 at 21:47:24 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: I did notice this: "I updated the ldc D compiler earlier today (incidentally, as part of upgrading my system with pacman -Syu), and now it doesn't compile at all. It was previously compiling, and ran at around 90% the speed o

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2014-12-22 Thread logicchains via Digitalmars-d
On Sunday, 21 December 2014 at 09:48:24 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On Saturday, 20 December 2014 at 21:47:24 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: I did notice this: "I updated the ldc D compiler earlier today (incidentally, as part of upgrading my system with pacman -Syu), and now it doesn't compile at all. It

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2014-12-22 Thread Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d
On 22 December 2014 at 11:45, logicchains via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On Sunday, 21 December 2014 at 09:48:24 UTC, Dicebot wrote: >> >> On Saturday, 20 December 2014 at 21:47:24 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: >>> >>> I did notice this: >>> >>> "I updated the ldc D compiler earlier today (incidentally, a

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2014-12-22 Thread via Digitalmars-d
On Monday, 22 December 2014 at 12:43:19 UTC, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d wrote: On 22 December 2014 at 11:45, logicchains via Digitalmars-d wrote: On Sunday, 21 December 2014 at 09:48:24 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On Saturday, 20 December 2014 at 21:47:24 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: I did notice

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2014-12-22 Thread logicchains via Digitalmars-d
On Monday, 22 December 2014 at 12:43:19 UTC, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d wrote: On 22 December 2014 at 11:45, logicchains via Digitalmars-d wrote: On Sunday, 21 December 2014 at 09:48:24 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On Saturday, 20 December 2014 at 21:47:24 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: I did notice

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2014-12-22 Thread Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d
On 22 December 2014 at 13:45, via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On Monday, 22 December 2014 at 12:43:19 UTC, Iain Buclaw via > Digitalmars-d wrote: >> >> On 22 December 2014 at 11:45, logicchains via Digitalmars-d >> wrote: >>> >>> On Sunday, 21 December 2014 at 09:48:24 UTC, Dicebot wrote: >>

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2014-12-22 Thread Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d
On 22 December 2014 at 17:01, Iain Buclaw wrote: > On 22 December 2014 at 13:45, via Digitalmars-d > wrote: >> On Monday, 22 December 2014 at 12:43:19 UTC, Iain Buclaw via >> Digitalmars-d wrote: >>> >>> On 22 December 2014 at 11:45, logicchains via Digitalmars-d >>> wrote: On Sunday,

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2014-12-22 Thread Dicebot via Digitalmars-d
On Monday, 22 December 2014 at 11:45:55 UTC, logicchains wrote: I installed the new Arch Linux LDC package but it still fails with the same error: /usr/lib/libldruntime.so: undefined reference to `__mulodi4' I did get GDC to work on ARM, but for some reason the resulting executable is horribl

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2014-12-22 Thread Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d
On 23 Dec 2014 07:15, "Dicebot via Digitalmars-d" < digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote: > > On Monday, 22 December 2014 at 11:45:55 UTC, logicchains wrote: >> >> I installed the new Arch Linux LDC package but it still fails with the same error: /usr/lib/libldruntime.so: undefined reference to `__mu

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2014-12-22 Thread Dicebot via Digitalmars-d
On Tuesday, 23 December 2014 at 07:21:20 UTC, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d wrote: Maybe you could set up a qemu-arm chroot? Probably I should. Didn't bother originally because ARM support is not part of Arch Linux upstream - it is separate project with own packaging infrastructure, they simp

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2014-12-23 Thread Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d
On 23 December 2014 at 07:28, Dicebot via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On Tuesday, 23 December 2014 at 07:21:20 UTC, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d > wrote: >> >> Maybe you could set up a qemu-arm chroot? > > > Probably I should. Didn't bother originally because ARM support is not part > of Arch Linux up

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2015-03-31 Thread Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d
On Tuesday, 23 December 2014 at 07:11:02 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On Monday, 22 December 2014 at 11:45:55 UTC, logicchains wrote: I installed the new Arch Linux LDC package but it still fails with the same error: /usr/lib/libldruntime.so: undefined reference to `__mulodi4' I did get GDC to work on

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2015-04-01 Thread Dicebot via Digitalmars-d
On Tuesday, 31 March 2015 at 21:49:00 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote: fwiw - very much appreciate your volunteer effort and that you probably have better things to do. but in case you weren't aware and did have time to look: I get the same linker error for _mulodi4. gdc works. (Arch ARM). Laeet

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2015-04-01 Thread Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d
On 1 April 2015 at 21:39, Dicebot via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On Tuesday, 31 March 2015 at 21:49:00 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote: >> >> fwiw - very much appreciate your volunteer effort and that you probably >> have better things to do. but in case you weren't aware and did have time >> to look: I get

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2015-04-01 Thread Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 1 April 2015 at 19:39:07 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On Tuesday, 31 March 2015 at 21:49:00 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote: fwiw - very much appreciate your volunteer effort and that you probably have better things to do. but in case you weren't aware and did have time to look: I get the same l

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2015-04-01 Thread Dicebot via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 1 April 2015 at 20:40:02 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote: Experimenting on my oneplusone phone running arch (geekbench3 2.9k) and will be back in range in a week. How much RAM do you think you need? If it is just a PKGBUILD issue - any amount will do. If building ldc itself will be ne

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2015-04-09 Thread Dicebot via Digitalmars-d
On Thursday, 9 April 2015 at 04:30:18 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On Wednesday, 1 April 2015 at 20:59:07 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On Wednesday, 1 April 2015 at 20:40:02 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote: Experimenting on my oneplusone phone running arch (geekbench3 2.9k) and will be back in range in a week. How muc

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2015-04-08 Thread Dicebot via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 1 April 2015 at 20:59:07 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On Wednesday, 1 April 2015 at 20:40:02 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote: Experimenting on my oneplusone phone running arch (geekbench3 2.9k) and will be back in range in a week. How much RAM do you think you need? If it is just a PKGBUILD is

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2015-04-11 Thread Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d
On Thursday, 9 April 2015 at 14:03:33 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On Thursday, 9 April 2015 at 04:30:18 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On Wednesday, 1 April 2015 at 20:59:07 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On Wednesday, 1 April 2015 at 20:40:02 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote: Experimenting on my oneplusone phone running arch (gee

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2015-04-12 Thread Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d
On Sunday, 12 April 2015 at 18:07:43 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On Saturday, 11 April 2015 at 23:04:26 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote: Thanks, v much Dicebot. (I think you have earned the right to own up to making simple errors without embarrassment in case you change your mind - it might help someone else

Re: ARMv7 vs x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more.

2015-04-12 Thread Dicebot via Digitalmars-d
On Saturday, 11 April 2015 at 23:04:26 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote: Thanks, v much Dicebot. (I think you have earned the right to own up to making simple errors without embarrassment in case you change your mind - it might help someone else to say what it was). Ha ha, it will hardly help anyone