Benchmarking suite

[via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 9 September 2015 at 14:00:07 UTC, qznc wrote:
> That is a good idea, if you want to measure compiler 
> optimizations. Ideally g++ and gdc should always yield the same 
> performance then?

Hopefully, as I understand GCC uses a highlevel IR, but if 
performance is equal that is a pretty strong argument to get 
people to adopt, if the rest of the language is polished.

And you could measure regressions.

> 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.

Ok, I see your point. You want to measure maximum throughput for 
critical applications that might benefit from language specific 
intrinsics.

Multithreaded applications could probably show some differences 
too, due to TLS/shared...

Maybe some kind of actor based benchmark. Essentially running 
thousands of fibers with lots of intercommunication.