On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 22:58:07 -0500, deadalnix <deadal...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, 4 March 2013 at 03:20:57 UTC, jerro wrote:
Maybe it is time to look at the python implementation and see why it
is faster.
It isn't faster:
$ time python3 test.py
real 0m14.217s
user 0m14.209s
sys 0m0.004s
$ gdmd -O -inline -release -noboundscheck test
$ time ./test
real 0m5.323s
user 0m5.312s
sys 0m0.008s
D code here uses the same string as the python code, not the one in
cvk012c's D code.
Using noboundcheck isn't fair as you give up on safety, so you are not
equivalent to python either.
In this type of test, there is no danger with using noboundscheck. It's a
very fair switch to use, D is just able to do it where python is not. A
sufficiently smart compiler could eliminate the bounds check for this
code, since it can be proven not to go out of bounds (in fact, a simple
run without the noboundscheck proves it in very deterministic code like
this).
-Steve
