CLR Performance Questionnaire

re: CLR Performance Questionnaire

cwbrandsma — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 07:10:03 GMT

*cough* .netcf *cough*

Sorry about that, something was caught in my throat. Now what was that?

re: CLR Performance Questionnaire

John Oglesby — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 20:24:43 GMT

We write high level financial analytics in .NET languages. Further down the code stack we use C++, in the main for performance reasons. C++ is more difficult for to write and debug, so we have a big interest in the performance improving. We would like to us F#/C# for most of our code but appears too slow today.

Our code is mostly in memory numeric manipulation, arrays of double, some trig functions etc.

John

re: CLR Performance Questionnaire

The Fiddler — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 02:06:51 GMT

We mainly work with 3d graphics and physics simulation. The Mono runtime has a significant advantage in this area, due to its faster p/invoke implementation and the Mono.Simd library, which exposes SIMD CPU extensions to managed code (needs runtime support, obviously).

Using Mono.Simd, we have seen performance improvements in the region of 2x-10x - which is very significant in our field of work!

re: CLR Performance Questionnaire

ShuggyCoUk — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:53:03 GMT

++ same as John

We use mix of c#, f#, C++/CLI

C++ where absolutely needed (often efficient interop with other c/c++ libraries)

I filled in the questionnaire already :)

re: CLR Performance Questionnaire

Keith Patrick — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 00:27:25 GMT

Can you suggest to them that "Please specify the version of the .NET Framework that you are using?" should be a list of checkboxes rather than radio? Some of us aren't fortunate enough to have our entire org shift BCL version across all apps simultaneously (I currenly use the last 3 versions and every now and then even have to code to 1.1)

re: CLR Performance Questionnaire

Justin_H — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:00:35 GMT

I also ended up having to just check .NET 2.0 in the questionnaire even though I also work on 3.5 and 1.1. Should have been check boxes I agree.

Thanks Fiddler for the info on Mono. I never would have considered using Mono on windows or that it may perform better in some scenarios.

re: CLR Performance Questionnaire

Julian — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 04:15:09 GMT

It would indeed be awesome if .NET had something similar to Mono.Simd. And while I've heard good things about Mono.Simd, I still think it's kind of weird to have a small set of structs that are treated very differently by the runtime than all the rest. Doesn't feel right. I suppose it would be more '.NET' if you could decorate a ValueType with an attribute, but I have no idea on the technical feasibility of that.

re: CLR Performance Questionnaire

Pop.Catalin — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 12:53:09 GMT

What I'd love to see in a future .Net runtime is:

- better am more efficient string manipulation (lot's of room for perf and memory optimizations here)

- inlining of delegate calls (at least those that are created in scope)

- SIMD support (Hardware agnostic SIMD would be really nice :) )

There are areas in computing where .Net is a bit out of reach like, numerics, simulations, 3D graphics, and it's a real shame for such a beautiful runtime to be left out ... but, I'm sure one day we will get there; you guys have the gift of exceeding my expectations when you finally add the things I wished for.