Benchmarking suite

[qznc via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 8 September 2015 at 23:20:05 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:
> On Tuesday, 8 September 2015 at 21:11:15 UTC, qznc wrote:
>> Yes. I'm not sure how to structure this whole suite. The 
>> general goal is "D claims that it can match C/C++ in 
>> performance, let's have some actual numbers". So far D mostly 
>> disappoints in terms of performance.
>
> The most interesting thing to test is how they fare with high 
> level optimization, not low level optimization. So make sure 
> the implementation is similar...

I'm not sure if I understand you correctly. What is "high level" 
and "low level" optimization?

What I want to know is a) how fast is "idiomatic" D code (using 
ranges etc) compared to "idiomatic" C/C++ and b) how do they 
compare if you push performance to the limits (code beauty be 
damned).

For a) you want a similar implementation although C/C++ will most 
certainly always loose in terms of length and convenience.

For b) we don't care. C/C++ is free to use builtins, pragmas, and 
whatnot. If for loops are faster than ranges in D, then we will 
use for loops here.