▲ | mike_hearn 8 days ago | |||||||
> There is no way that a single company could develop a state of the art compiler without using an existing one. Intel had a good independent compiler and gave up because open source had become superior. Not only can they do it but some companies have done it several times. Look at Oracle: there's HotSpot's C2 compiler, and the Graal compiler. Both state of the art, both developed by one company. Not unique. Microsoft and Apple have built many compilers alone over their lifespan. This whole thing is insanely subjective, but that's why I'm making fun of the "unsubstantiated claim" bit. How exactly are you meant to objectively compare this? | ||||||||
▲ | mafuy 5 days ago | parent [-] | |||||||
I've searched for some performance comparisons between Graal and equivalent GCC programs and it seems like Graal is not quite at the same level - unsurprisingly, it is probably more concerned with avoiding boxing than optimal use of SIMD. And as much as I love Roslyn, which is/was a Microsoft thing: it has the same issue. It only recently got serious about competing with C, and that's years after it was open sourced. | ||||||||
|