alt Hacker NewsI think the conclusion section should indicate that they are based entirely on GCC 16's behavior and current implementation. We should avoid generalizing one compiler's behavior and performance. Curious how this same test would behave once clang ships C++26 reflection.
Replies
pjmlp • today at 6:19 AM
Or VC++ if ever, which has the best modules support, but it is still trailing behind in C++23.
bluGill • yesterday at 1:36 PM
I was thinking the same thing. Modules are still not widely used, it is a reasonable guess that there are a lot of optimization opportunities left.
➕ show 1 reply
I explicitly mentioned that GCC 16.1 was the compiler used in the benchmarking section, do you think I also need to add a disclaimer in the conclusion section as well?
Regardless, I don't think things are going to differ much with Clang. Without PCH/modules, standard header inclusion is still the "slow part" of C++ compilation, regardless of the compiler used and the standard library used (libstdc++ vs libc++). `#include` is fundamentally the same on any modern compiler.
Because the reflection feature itself seems quite fast on GCC (compared to the cost of the header), I predict the results will be similar on Clang as well.