3 ms·

> I've noticed Microsoft seems to think ordinary compiler optimizations are deep magic they're very proud of not implementing. Do they just not have good enough

• astrange 3y ago
  That's not an attack, unless you designed .NET, in which case I'm of course referring to your recruiters and not you. Anyway, it's the part about how C# doesn't need to implement scalar replacement because it has structs. Do it anyway, it's good! But I've also noticed (reading some .NET developer blog post I couldn't find for you now) them talking about how they couldn't do inlining because it would take too long and be too slow, so they put some very simple heuristics that did not look like a good trade off. Inlining of course is often very beneficial and can decrease code size.
  • neonsunset 3y ago
    Well, this kind of attitude is just sad. Rather than imagining issues .NET has without verifying them first and then complaining, I'd like to suggest to spot check assumptions with Godbolt[0] which would be a good start (it can't show DynamicPGO, NativeAOT-specific and some other opts but is still fairly illustrative). A more comprehensive view of produced asm can be acquired with [DisassemblyDiagnoser] attribute when running code with BenchmarkDotNet [1] (in the Java world a similar solution is called JMH). [0] https://godbolt.org/ https://godbolt.org/ [1] https://benchmarkdotnet.org/articles/guides/getting-started.html https://benchmarkdotnet.org/articles/guides/getting-started....