On Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 01:35:44AM +0100, Daniel Kozak via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
[...]
>> Try addressing the points I wrote above and see if it makes a
>> difference.
>
>I have tried it (all of it) even before you wrote it here, because
>I have completely the same ideas, but
On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 4:44 PM H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-learn <
digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com> wrote:
> Taking a look at this code:
> ...
> Try addressing the points I wrote above and see if it makes a
> difference.
>
>
I have tried it (all of it) even before you wrote it here, because
On Friday, 19 January 2024 at 17:18:36 UTC, evilrat wrote:
On Friday, 19 January 2024 at 16:55:25 UTC, ryuukk_ wrote:
You do hash map lookup for every character in D, it's slow,
whereas in Rust you do it via pattern matching, java does the
same, pattern matching
Yet another reason to
On Friday, 19 January 2024 at 08:57:40 UTC, Renato wrote:
Do you know why the whole thread seems to have disappeared??
There's a lot of good stuff in the thread, it would be a huge
shame to lose all that!
I agree! Thanks for posting your benchmarks, I thought your whole
benching setup was
On Friday, January 19, 2024 3:49:29 AM MST Jim Balter via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> On Friday, 17 November 2017 at 17:55:30 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
>
> wrote:
> > When you have
> >
> > foreach(e; range)
> >
> > it gets lowered to something like
> >
> > for(auto r = range; !r.empty; r.popFront())
On Friday, 19 January 2024 at 16:55:25 UTC, ryuukk_ wrote:
You do hash map lookup for every character in D, it's slow,
whereas in Rust you do it via pattern matching, java does the
same, pattern matching
Yet another reason to advocate for pattern matching in D and
switch as expression
On Friday, 19 January 2024 at 13:40:39 UTC, Renato wrote:
On Friday, 19 January 2024 at 10:15:57 UTC, evilrat wrote:
On Friday, 19 January 2024 at 09:08:17 UTC, Renato wrote:
I forgot to mention: the Java version is using a Trie... and
it consistently beats the Rust numeric algorithm (which
On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 01:40:39PM +, Renato via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> On Friday, 19 January 2024 at 10:15:57 UTC, evilrat wrote:
[...]
> > Additionally if you comparing D by measuring DMD performance -
> > don't. It is valuable in developing for fast iterations, but it
> > lacks many
On Friday, 19 January 2024 at 10:15:57 UTC, evilrat wrote:
On Friday, 19 January 2024 at 09:08:17 UTC, Renato wrote:
I forgot to mention: the Java version is using a Trie... and
it consistently beats the Rust numeric algorithm (which means
it's still faster than your D solution), but the
On Friday, 19 January 2024 at 10:15:57 UTC, evilrat wrote:
On Friday, 19 January 2024 at 09:08:17 UTC, Renato wrote:
I forgot to mention: the Java version is using a Trie... and
it consistently beats the Rust numeric algorithm (which means
it's still faster than your D solution), but the
On Friday, 17 November 2017 at 17:55:30 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
When you have
foreach(e; range)
it gets lowered to something like
for(auto r = range; !r.empty; r.popFront())
{
auto e = r.front;
}
So, the range is copied when you use it in a foreach.
Indeed, and the language spec
On Friday, 19 January 2024 at 05:17:51 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 04:23:16PM +, Renato via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote: [...]
Ok, last time I'm running this for someone else :D
```
Proc,Run,Memory(bytes),Time(ms)
===> ./rust
./rust,23920640,30
./rust,24018944,147
12 matches
Mail list logo
