avo VS zig

I wonder whether avo could have been useful here?[1] I mention it because it came up the last time we were talking about AVX operations in go.[2]

1 = https://github.com/mmcloughlin/avo

2 = https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34465297

I thought the /r/golang comments on this post were pretty useful[1]. They also introduced me to avo[2], a tool for generating x86 assembly from go that I hadn't seen before. There are some examples listed on the avo github page for generating AVX512 instructions with avo.

1 = https://www.reddit.com/r/golang/comments/10hmh07/how_to_use_...

2 = https://github.com/mmcloughlin/avo

For writing AVX512 from scratch avo is a much better alternative.

Avo is a library that simplifies writing complex go assembly, I found it very useful to figure out how instructions map onto Go's asm syntax. But you could definitely do the translation directly, it's what c2goasm did (couldn't get it to work reliably unfortunately).

Curious if you're looking at using avo to write the assembly

You can use github.com/mmcloughlin/avo for generating the assembly use Go.

For normal and "better" mode I am using avo to generate different encoders for different input sizes, with and without Snappy compatibility. That currently outputs about 17k lines of assembly.

You could perhaps just have the Go compiler generate the assembler for your code:

go tool compile -S file.go > file_amd64.s

Then you could verify it doesn't change over time, and choose to begin maintaining by hand if it makes sense.

If you do want to go the route of rolling it yourself, I'd suggest looking into something like Avo: https://github.com/mmcloughlin/avo

If you have to go with Assembly, try Avo https://github.com/mmcloughlin/avo

There is an issue proposing this approach: https://github.com/ziglang/zig/issues/4284

https://github.com/ziglang/zig/issues/224

e.g.:

> > When debugging/prototyping, it's useful to comment out a line without having to refactor, e.g.

When writing code in a scripting language, sometimes you need that extra bit of performance (or maybe an async feature from Zig).

NodeJS is by no means a slow runtime, it wouldn’t be so popular if it was. But compared to Bun, it’s slow. Bun was built from the ground up with speed in mind, using both JavascriptCore and Zig. The Bun team spent an enormous amount of time and energy trying to make Bun fast, including lots of profiling, benchmarking, and optimizations.

ntdll.dll!RtlUserThreadStart()

There are valid reasons to use APIs from NTDLL. Where I disagree with zig#1840 is the idea that it is always better to use NTDLL versions of API. Every other software ecosystem uses the standard Win32 APIs and diverging from that without a good reason seems like a good way to have unexpected behavior. One concrete example is most users and programmers expect Windows to redirect some file system paths when running on WOW64. But this is implemented in Kernel32, not ntdll.

https://github.com/ziglang/zig/issues/11894

Zig also has an IRC channel on libera (#zig) that is moderated by Andrew Kelley.[1]

[1] https://github.com/ziglang/zig/wiki/Community