On Wednesday, 24 July 2013 at 07:20:16 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote:
This comment is worrying:
"Can you try D version without std.random, and use srand and
rand from std.c.stdlib? I think it should be almost same speed
as C version ;-)"
"Wow! Just tried that, and this brings the running time of the
DMD-compiled version to 0.770s from 1.290, the GDC-compiled
version from 1.060 to 0.680s, and the LDC version to 0.580s
from 0.710s. Meaning the LDC version is on par with the
Clang-compiled C version and just slightly beats the
GCC-compiled C one! There really should be a warning note in
the std.random library documentation that for
performance-critical code the C stdlib random generator is a
better choice."
Is this just because RNGs are value types? It's literally
causing bad press for D, so this needs to be high on the
priority list.
The c stdlib random number generation isn't very random.
There should be a note in std.random docs warning that it's
slower but better than the c stdlib version.
