Re: Can you write code directly in CIL ???


"Peter Olcott" <olcott@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:g8ksf.38005$QW2.12382@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "Willy Denoyette [MVP]" <willy.denoyette@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:%233iWaovCGHA.1032@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> "Peter Olcott" <olcott@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:IEbsf.37965$QW2.18916@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>> "Abubakar" <abubakarm@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>> news:%23tiR4prCGHA.3820@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Hi,
>>>>> Cab you write code directly in the Common Intermediate language? I
>>>>> need to
>>>>> optimize a critical real-time function.
>>>>
>>>> ofcourse you can, by now you may even have done it. Just write few *.il
>>>> lines and pass it to ilasm (that comes with the sdk) and you'll get the
>>>> managed binary.
>>>>
>>>> although Nicholas tried explaning. I have just few things to add.
>>>>
>>>> 1- If you look at the shared source implementation of .net, ie, SSCLI
>>>> (aka
>>>> ROTOR), you wont find a single *.il file that microsoft devs had to
>>>> write in
>>>> order to acheive better performance. The max they did to write fast
>>>> code as
>>>> a .net code was to write the unsafe C# code (which uses pointers).
>>>> Beyond
>>>> that, places that needed to get maximum efficiency like JIT, they used
>>>> a
>>>> pure c++ code and in very few places, x86 assembly code was used. I
>>>> think if
>>>> those developers could acheive anything significant by writing il
>>>> directly,
>>>> they would have done that.
>>> What I had in mind was to write the best possible code in C++ and have
>>> the best compiler translate this into assembly language. The best
>>> compiler so far seems to be Visual C++ 6.0. Some of the optimizations in
>>> 7.0 are disabled, in particular function inlining. Then I was going to
>>> hand tweak this generated assembly language. Then as a final step I was
>>> going to translate this into CIL.
>>>
>>>> 2- C# compiler is as clever in generating msil as anyone can possibly
>>>> get. I
>>> False assumption when one examines the benchmarks of managed C++ against
>>> managed C#, Managed C++ does significantly better in at least some
>>> cases.
>>>
>>
>> Not sure where you get this from? Did you actually run such benchmarks?
>> I did run many benchmarks, since v1.0 comparing both C# and Managed C++
>> (and C++/CLI) and I never saw a delta (yes, for some C# is the winner)
>> larger than 5%, using v2 they are even smaller.
>>
>>
>>
>> Willy.
>>
>>
> I found it on the web, some of the differences were several-fold. I don't
> know which versions.

Well, they were wrong, for sure, Please post the URL's where you found this
kind of nonsense.

Willy.



.

Loading