Live data from Hacker News

Optimizations in C++ Compilers

queue.acm.org

11–20 of 21 posts

Re: Optimizations in C++ Compilers

#11

Compiler Explorer (aka godbolt) is awesome; I use it at least weekly. It's amazing how many more code generation questions occur to me now that there's so much less friction in getting the answers.

I host it locally for myself too and got the CLion plugin, it is amazing. Seeing actual codegen in projets with multiple files is really something and having the same scrolling with ASM or source too.

Re: Optimizations in C++ Compilers

#12
The floating point comment leaves out that one can use

    #pragma omp simd reduction(+:res)
as a more precise way to achieve vectorization in the reduction (compile with -fopenmp-simd to only use it for SIMD without linking an OpenMP library): https://godbolt.org/z/17oTz1

Unfortunately, the pragma is not supported with the new-style class iterators in a released compiler, though it works in clang-trunk: https://godbolt.org/z/hbP11W Note that Clang disables floating point contraction by default (so no vfmadd instructions), despite them being more accurate. One usually wants this globally (-ffp-contract=fast) except when trying to bitwise reproduce software compiled for pre-Haswell.

Re: Optimizations in C++ Compilers

#13

> Tail call removal. A recursive function that ends in a call to itself can often be rewritten as a loop, reducing call overhead and reducing the chance of stack overflow. Most important: this optimization enables pipelined execution. When people talk about a CPU executing an integer add instruction in ~1 cycle, what they actually mean is that the add has this latency when the CPU pipelines are full. If you have an 1…

Tail call removal is much broader than that. Compilers will remove even indirect tail calls, which is useful when building a fast interpreter. I tried this with a small example (using Godbolt, of course), now let’s see if it works for a full interpreter.

Re: Optimizations in C++ Compilers

#16

> Tail call removal. A recursive function that ends in a call to itself can often be rewritten as a loop, reducing call overhead and reducing the chance of stack overflow. Most important: this optimization enables pipelined execution. When people talk about a CPU executing an integer add instruction in ~1 cycle, what they actually mean is that the add has this latency when the CPU pipelines are full. If you have an 1…

Interestingly, I've seen infinite recursions get optimized to infinite tail calls. This makes debugging harder because instead of a stack overflow you just have an infinite loop and have to manually go kill the process and get a breakpoint.

Then, looking at the code it's not obvious where the infinite loop occurs.

Re: Optimizations in C++ Compilers

#17
> I hope that some of these optimizations are a pleasant surprise and will factor in your decisions to write clear, intention-revealing code and leave it to the compiler to do the right thing.

This was my key takeaway from this article. Writing clear code that is easier to maintain will have good enough performance most of the time. I was particularly impressed with the devirtualization optimizations and will be less likely to shy away from using polymorphism in future due to performance concerns.

Re: Optimizations in C++ Compilers

#18
post #3

> I went home that evening and created Compiler Explorer. Nice try. You can’t escape being known as a verb now. Everyone knows the tool as godbolt.

Interesting tool I've never used, for the uninitiated: https://godbolt.org/

Interesting, but broken in Firefox. Could not get it to run and then I thought "maybe in Chrome..." and then got it to work.

Re: Optimizations in C++ Compilers

#19
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting tool I've never used, for the uninitiated: https://godbolt.org/

Interesting, but broken in Firefox. Could not get it to run and then I thought "maybe in Chrome..." and then got it to work.

What did you do to get it to work?
Post reply on HN