[Const-me]

Interesting, I never heard about that. Was merged to master in February 2022, I wonder which release version includes the changes?

Still, the support seems very limited. They simply probe argument type for arrays and lists. Any other IEnumerable gonna return false from TryGetSpan, which reverts to the legacy scalar implementation.

[merb]

pretty sure thats dotnet 7 only stuff. I can vaguely remember a blog post about it: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/performance_improvemen... (I think this is the one?)

it's faster in bigger arrays/lists but smaller ones barely make a difference, even the linq vs non-linq make basically only noise difference as far as I remember.

[neonsunset]

Algorithms that work on non-contiguous or synthesized data are not subject to vectorization in any language, aside from select cases where LLVM is able to inline and auto-vectorize loops in Rust for certain simple cases of map->collect.

What is your argument then?

[Const-me]

My point is the support is very limited, only works for a few trivial use cases, like sum/min/max/average of arrays of a few selected types.

I believe it’s technically possible to vectorize more complicated stuff in C#, just the runtime library is not doing that. For an example, look at how Eigen C++ library https://eigen.tuxfamily.org/index.php?title=Main_Page does their math. Under the hood, they wrap inputs into classes which supply SIMD registers, then do math on these registers. Eigen does that in compile-time with template metaprogramming. A hypothetical C# implementation could do similar things using generics and/or runtime code generation. LINQ from the standard library was never designed for high-performance compute, but I think it might be possible to design similar API for that.

[neonsunset]

How is that relevant to the vast majority of the code targeted by LINQ?

The niche scenario you have outlined is partially covered by a recent System.Numerics.Tensors package update (even though I believe it would have been best if there was a community-maintained package with comparable quality for a variety of reasons).

The goal of LINQ itself is to offer optimal codepaths when it can within the constraints of the current design (naturally, you could improve it significantly if not for backwards compatibility with the previous 15 or so years of .NET codebases). The argument that it's not good because it's not the tool to do BLAS is just nonsensical.

There is, however, an IL optimizer that can further vectorize certain common patterns and rewrite LINQ calls into open-coded loops: https://github.com/dubiousconst282/DistIL

[Const-me]

> How is that relevant to the vast majority of the code targeted by LINQ?

The people I responded to were discussing applicability of LINQ. I think very fast sum of List<int> collections doesn’t compensate for suboptimal performance of pretty much everything else.

For 80% of problems that “suboptimal” is still fast enough for the job, but for other 20% it’s important. Using the same C# language it’s often possible to outperform LINQ by a large factor, using loops, SIMD intrinsics, and minimizing GC allocations.

> partially covered by a recent System.Numerics.Tensors package

They don’t generate code in runtime, they treat C# as a slower and safer C. I’m pretty sure the higher-level parts of the runtime allow more advanced stuff, similar to expression templates in Eigen, but better because runtime codegen could account for different ISA extensions, and even different L1/L2 cache sizes.

[neonsunset]

I see, my bad, should not have responded in the first place.