Benchmarking suite

[Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d]

On 9 September 2015 at 16:00, qznc via Digitalmars-d <
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:

> On Wednesday, 9 September 2015 at 09:56:10 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
>
>> I think the better approach is to write up the same algorithms in a high
>> level fashion (using generic templates on both sides) from the ground up
>> using the same constructs and measure the ability to optimize.
>>
>
> That is a good idea, if you want to measure compiler optimizations.
> Ideally g++ and gdc should always yield the same performance then?
>
> However, it does answer the wrong question imho.
>
> Suppose you consider using D with C/C++ as the stable alternative. D lures
> you with its high level features. However, you know that you will have to
> really optimize some hot spots sooner or later. Will D impose a penalty on
> you and C/C++ could have provided better performance?
>
> Walter argues that there is no technical reason why D should be slower
> than C/C++. My experience with the benchmarks says, there seem to be such
> penalties. For example, there is no __builtin_ia32_cmplepd or
> __builtin_ia32_movmskpd like gcc has.
>

import gcc.builtins;  // OK, cheating. :-)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20150909/90b9b05d/attachment.html>