On 8/3/2013 3:28 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Saturday, August 03, 2013 14:55:29 Walter Bright wrote:
This is for testing porpoises, and of course for those that Feel Da Need For
Speed.
But what if I prefer to test dolphins? ;)
They all look alike anyway, what's the difference?
Am 05.08.2013 19:52, schrieb Walter Bright:
On 8/5/2013 4:01 AM, Richard Webb wrote:
Using the latest DMD and this snn.lib, i'm seeing it take about 11.5 seconds to
compile the algorithm unit tests (when i tried it last week, it was taking
closer to 17 seconds).
For comparison, the MSVC build
On 05/08/2013 18:52, Walter Bright wrote:
This is hardly the first time the culprit was a library routine
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
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
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
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
On 03/08/2013 22:55, Walter Bright wrote:
The execrable existing implementation was scrapped, and the new one uses
Windows HeapAlloc().
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/snn.lib
This is for testing porpoises, and of course for those that Feel Da Need
For Speed.
Using the latest DMD and this
Am 04.08.2013 11:28, schrieb Denis Shelomovskij:
04.08.2013 1:55, Walter Bright пОÑеÑ:
The execrable existing implementation was scrapped, and the new one uses
Windows HeapAlloc().
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/snn.lib
This is for testing porpoises, and of course for those that Feel Da Need
On 8/5/2013 4:01 AM, Richard Webb wrote:
Using the latest DMD and this snn.lib, i'm seeing it take about 11.5 seconds to
compile the algorithm unit tests (when i tried it last week, it was taking
closer to 17 seconds).
For comparison, the MSVC build takes about 10 seconds on the same machine
On Sunday, 4 August 2013 at 09:28:11 UTC, Denis Shelomovskij
wrote:
So I suppose you use `HeapFree` too? Please, be sure you use
this Windows API BOOL/BOOLEAN bug workaround:
https://github.com/denis-sh/phobos-additions/blob/e061d1ad282b4793d1c75dfcc20962b99ec842df/unstd/windows/heap.d#L178
On Monday, 5 August 2013 at 21:42:11 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Sunday, 4 August 2013 at 09:28:11 UTC, Denis Shelomovskij
wrote:
So I suppose you use `HeapFree` too? Please, be sure you use
this Windows API BOOL/BOOLEAN bug workaround:
Am 03.08.2013 23:55, schrieb Walter Bright:
The execrable existing implementation was scrapped, and the new one uses Windows
HeapAlloc().
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/snn.lib
This is for testing porpoises, and of course for those that Feel Da Need For
Speed.
ever tested nedmalloc
On 8/3/2013 11:07 PM, dennis luehring wrote:
ever tested nedmalloc (http://www.nedprod.com/programs/portable/nedmalloc/) or
other malloc allocators?
No, I haven't.
On Sunday, 4 August 2013 at 06:07:54 UTC, dennis luehring wrote:
ever tested nedmalloc
(http://www.nedprod.com/programs/portable/nedmalloc/) or other
malloc allocators?
Windows 7, Linux 3.x, FreeBSD 8, Mac OS X 10.6 all contain
state-of-the-art allocators and no third party allocator is
On 8/4/2013 12:19 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
On Sunday, 4 August 2013 at 06:07:54 UTC, dennis luehring wrote:
ever tested nedmalloc (http://www.nedprod.com/programs/portable/nedmalloc/) or
other malloc allocators?
Windows 7, Linux 3.x, FreeBSD 8, Mac OS X 10.6 all contain
Am 04.08.2013 09:35, schrieb Walter Bright:
On 8/4/2013 12:19 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
On Sunday, 4 August 2013 at 06:07:54 UTC, dennis luehring wrote:
ever tested nedmalloc (http://www.nedprod.com/programs/portable/nedmalloc/) or
other malloc allocators?
Windows 7, Linux 3.x,
On 8/4/2013 12:53 AM, dennis luehring wrote:
HeapAlloc is a forwarder to RtlHeapAlloc and C++ new does call RtlHeapAlloc
directly - would it be better to use this kernel32 api directly? (maybe if used
in druntime to reduce dll dependencies)
I can't find any documentation on RtlHeapAlloc.
04.08.2013 11:53, dennis luehring пишет:
Am 04.08.2013 09:35, schrieb Walter Bright:
On 8/4/2013 12:19 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
On Sunday, 4 August 2013 at 06:07:54 UTC, dennis luehring wrote:
ever tested nedmalloc
(http://www.nedprod.com/programs/portable/nedmalloc/) or
other
04.08.2013 1:55, Walter Bright пишет:
The execrable existing implementation was scrapped, and the new one uses
Windows HeapAlloc().
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/snn.lib
This is for testing porpoises, and of course for those that Feel Da Need
For Speed.
So I suppose you use `HeapFree` too?
On 8/4/2013 2:28 AM, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
04.08.2013 1:55, Walter Bright пишет:
The execrable existing implementation was scrapped, and the new one uses
Windows HeapAlloc().
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/snn.lib
This is for testing porpoises, and of course for those that Feel Da Need
For
your're right it was RtlAllocateHeap
Am 04.08.2013 11:25, schrieb Denis Shelomovskij:
04.08.2013 11:53, dennis luehring пОÑеÑ:
Am 04.08.2013 09:35, schrieb Walter Bright:
On 8/4/2013 12:19 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
On Sunday, 4 August 2013 at 06:07:54 UTC, dennis luehring
The execrable existing implementation was scrapped, and the new one uses Windows
HeapAlloc().
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/snn.lib
This is for testing porpoises, and of course for those that Feel Da Need For
Speed.
On 8/3/2013 2:55 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
Feel Da Need For Speed.
So much better than:
Feel Da Need For Reduced Elapsed Time
:-)
On Saturday, August 03, 2013 14:55:29 Walter Bright wrote:
The execrable existing implementation was scrapped, and the new one uses
Windows HeapAlloc().
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/snn.lib
This is for testing porpoises, and of course for those that Feel Da Need For
Speed.
But what if I
24 matches
Mail list logo