www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - DMD 2.064 alpha windows build

reply "Temtaime" <temtaime gmail.com> writes:
Hi, guys!
I've made DMD build using MSVC(ICC has some performance troubles) 
and tcmalloc, so it can compile more than 2x faster.

http://acomirei.ru/u/dmd.7z
It uses lastest DMD, druntime and Phobos.
Aug 31 2013
parent reply Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> writes:
Do you have a source for this? I don't trust random binaries,
especially ones that are hosted on an .ru site..

On 8/31/13, Temtaime <temtaime gmail.com> wrote:

 Hi, guys!
 I've made DMD build using MSVC(ICC has some performance troubles)
 and tcmalloc, so it can compile more than 2x faster.

 http://acomirei.ru/u/dmd.7z
 It uses lastest DMD, druntime and Phobos.
Aug 31 2013
parent reply "Temtaime" <temtaime gmail.com> writes:
You can get DMD source on DMD's github.

I've read DMD backend license, so it forbids to distribute DMD 
itself.

I've removed the archive. I'll investigate in LDC.
Aug 31 2013
next sibling parent Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> writes:
On 8/31/13, Temtaime <temtaime gmail.com> wrote:

 You can get DMD source on DMD's github.


I'm asking about the modified version which uses tcmalloc. You've said
it compiles 2x faster, but faster to what? The regular MSVC build is
already known to be 2x faster than the one built with DMC.
Aug 31 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply dennis luehring <dl.soluz gmx.net> writes:
Am 31.08.2013 20:58, schrieb Temtaime:

 You can get DMD source on DMD's github.

 I've read DMD backend license, so it forbids to distribute DMD
 itself.

 I've removed the archive. I'll investigate in LDC.


it seems that the old malloc implementation was the source of
the 2x speed difference between dmc and msvc build

http://forum.dlang.org/thread/ktju8h$efb$1 digitalmars.com

so you're tcmalloc version is 2x faster or 4x?
Aug 31 2013
parent reply Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> writes:
On 9/1/13, dennis luehring <dl.soluz gmx.net> wrote:

 it seems that the old malloc implementation was the source of
 the 2x speed difference between dmc and msvc build


Not really, the MSVC build is still faster. :)
Sep 01 2013
parent reply Richard Webb <richard.webb boldonjames.com> writes:
On 01/09/2013 13:46, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

 On 9/1/13, dennis luehring <dl.soluz gmx.net> wrote:

 it seems that the old malloc implementation was the source of
 the 2x speed difference between dmc and msvc build


 Not really, the MSVC build is still faster. :)


It made up the bulk of the difference for the algorithm unit tests at 
least - The MSVC build is still faster, but only a bit rather than 
several times.
Sep 02 2013
parent reply "Temtaime" <temtaime gmail.com> writes:
I'm using Windows 8.1.

2x faster than DMD from downloads section(seems to be built with 
DMC).

I'm only removed overloading for operators new and delete from 
DMD frontend and link statically tcmalloc 2.0.
Sep 02 2013
next sibling parent dennis luehring <dl.soluz gmx.net> writes:
Am 02.09.2013 18:37, schrieb Temtaime:

 I'm using Windows 8.1.

 2x faster than DMD from downloads section(seems to be built with
 DMC).

 I'm only removed overloading for operators new and delete from
 DMD frontend and link statically tcmalloc 2.0.


and what is the speed gain comparing your msc_dmd_tcmalloc with plain 
msc_dmd?

test both with

dmd std\algorithm -unittest –main
Sep 02 2013
prev sibling parent "growler" <growlercab gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 2 September 2013 at 16:37:35 UTC, Temtaime wrote:

 I'm using Windows 8.1.

 2x faster than DMD from downloads section(seems to be built 
 with DMC).


I'm confused, sorry. Is that the downloads section on dlang.org? 
I only see 2.063.2, so are you comparing:

a) 2.063.2 DMC with 2.064 github MSVC
or
b) 2.064 DMC github with 2.064 github MSVC
or
c) 2.063.2 DMC with 2.063.2 MSVC ?

If a) then the 2x faster could a due to a number of things, 
including this:

http://forum.dlang.org/thread/ksrpbe$1i21$1 digitalmars.com


I'd be interested to see b) or c) with MSVC, ICC GCC and DMC. In 
fact I'm off to try it now...once I get my Windows partition 
working again!

G.
Sep 02 2013
prev sibling parent dennis luehring <dl.soluz gmx.net> writes:
Am 31.08.2013 20:58, schrieb Temtaime:

 You can get DMD source on DMD's github.

 I've read DMD backend license, so it forbids to distribute DMD
 itself.

 I've removed the archive. I'll investigate in LDC.


btw: nedmalloc stated on its own homepage...
http://www.nedprod.com/programs/portable/nedmalloc/

"If you're running on an older operating system (e.g. Windows XP, Linux 
2.4 series, FreeBSD 6 series, Mac OS X 10.4 or earlier) you will 
probably find it significantly improves your application's performance 
(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 likely to 
significantly improve on them in real world results)."

so you're running an older OS?
Aug 31 2013