www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.ldc - LDC 1.2.0-beta2 has been released!

reply Kai Nacke <kai redstar.de> writes:
Hi everyone!

On behalf of the LDC team I announce the new 1.2.0-beta2 release!
It is based on the 2.072.2 front-end and supports LLVM 3.5-4.0.

This beta release contains some important fixes. Be sure to read 
the change log at the GitHub release page for details. The 
packages are available for download at the same page.
https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/releases/tag/v1.2.0-beta2

MD5 checksums for the release packages:

ae6284edc8d170bfffdc8a01171ba2a3  ldc-1.2.0-beta2-src.tar.gz
98a4541599f8ffec045c72c2af9041d4  
ldc2-1.2.0-beta2-freebsd-x86_64.tar.xz
d88b49468de4ae8acdbc5cf4d92037c9  
ldc2-1.2.0-beta2-linux-x86.tar.xz
3f67d08657e495ffe62e7d039b9711bd  
ldc2-1.2.0-beta2-linux-x86_64.tar.xz
5248d5c272252af5c966a687b4d0226c  
ldc2-1.2.0-beta2-osx-x86_64.tar.xz
93995b85d056f9069dc1cb132e8bf332  ldc2-1.2.0-beta2-win32-msvc.zip
02f10dc4c33ccfa3dbd046b8a131c1df  ldc2-1.2.0-beta2-win64-msvc.zip

Regarding the binaries:
The Linux x86/x86_64 binaries are built on Ubuntu 12.04 LTS with 
gcc 4.8.x, ldc2 1.2.0-beta2 and LLVM 4.0.0. They work on Ubuntu 
12.04 LTS (or later) without installing additional software.

The OS X binaries and the FreeBSD binaries are built with LLVM 
4.0.0.

The Win32 and Win64 MSVC versions are built with VS2015 and LLVM 
3.9.1 (due to a regression in LLVM 4.0).

Please be sure to report any bugs at 
https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/issues, and feel free to 
drop by at the digitalmars.D.ldc forums 
(http://forum.dlang.org/group/digitalmars.D.ldc) for any 
questions or comments.

Thanks to everybody involved in making this happen!

Regards,
Kai
Apr 04 2017
parent reply Johan Engelen <j j.nl> writes:
On Wednesday, 5 April 2017 at 03:57:19 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:

 
 ... binaries are built with LLVM 4.0.0.


With the large performance regression for mir [1], are we OK with 
building the release binaries with LLVM 4.0, or shall we use LLVM 
3.9?

Cheers,
   Johan

[1] https://github.com/libmir/mir-glas/issues/18
Apr 05 2017
parent reply kinke <noone nowhere.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 5 April 2017 at 21:59:22 UTC, Johan Engelen wrote:

 With the large performance regression for mir [1], are we OK 
 with building the release binaries with LLVM 4.0, or shall we 
 use LLVM 3.9?

 Cheers,
   Johan

 [1] https://github.com/libmir/mir-glas/issues/18


Hmm don't know, that's just *one* runtime performance regression. 
There are also cases where 4.0 brings a speed-up by 150% compared 
to 3.9.1, see the results for SciMark2 here for example: 
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=gcc7-clang4-jan&num=3
(I guess the fix isn't on the Clang side, but on LLVM's).
Apr 06 2017
parent David Nadlinger via digitalmars-d-ldc <digitalmars-d-ldc puremagic.com> writes:
On 6 Apr 2017, at 15:52, kinke via digitalmars-d-ldc wrote:

 Hmm don't know, that's just *one* runtime performance regression. 
 There are also cases where 4.0 brings a speed-up by 150% compared to 
 3.9.1, see the results for SciMark2 here for example: 
 http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=gcc7-clang4-jan&num=3
 (I guess the fix isn't on the Clang side, but on LLVM's).


Agreed; if Ilya's example is just register allocation going slightly 
wrong in a single microkernel, it's probably not a major issue (albeit, 
of course, an annoying regression that shouldn't have happened). It 
would still be nice to have confirmation about what is going on here, 
though.

  — David
Apr 06 2017