D compiler benchmarks

[Robert Clipsham]

Jason House wrote:
> I don't think it's proper to limit solutions to either Phobos or Tango, or either D1 or D2. Why not include all mixes of standard libraries, compilers, and major D versions?
> 
> I've always heard Tango is faster... Let's see proof!
> Similarly, D2 aims to do multithreading better. I'd love to see performance and code differences between D1 and D2.

These benchmarks are designed purely to test the compilers, not the 
libraries. I agree that it might be interesting to see benchmarks 
between tango and phobos, I might set some up at some point. I know 
there are already some benchmarks up for XML performance of 
tango/phobos/other xml libraries at http://dotnot.org/, as well as some 
tests showing performance of the GC at 
http://www.dsource.org/projects/tango/wiki/GCBenchmark. Neither of these 
are up to date or test the full extent of the libraries, but do show 
some difference in performance. As I stated in my post I chose tango 
purely because ldc does not currently support phobos. The choice of 
library should not affect performance as all benchmarks use stdc for any 
external functions.

I will not be setting up benchmarks for D2 yet, as there is currently 
only one D2 compiler and it is in alpha. When there are multiple D2 
compilers, I will set up some more benchmarks for them. Similarly when 
D2 moves out of alpha I will happily put it against D1 if there is demand.