On Tuesday, 22 December 2015 at 18:27:12 UTC, cym13 wrote:
...
I don't think there is anything in the standard
library that would really help here as (if I read it correctly)
it is mainly
because of the conversion from ranges to arrays that this code
is slow.
Yes, it has been faster in past, when I last check and optimeze
to!string. But because of @nogc it has been rewriten to Range
base version which is slower. In this case it makes sense to add
special version without @nogc (to!string will allocate memory
anyway) which just use dup on buffer instead of make Range.
I will probably make pull request tomorrow.
