On 7/24/13 2:43 AM, monarch_dodra wrote:
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 whole of std.random is nothing but problems and pitfalls, biting us
and our users on a regular basis :/
What are the other problems aside from value semantics?
Andrei
