On Monday, 4 June 2018 at 17:40:57 UTC, Dennis wrote:
On Monday, 4 June 2018 at 15:43:20 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
Note, it's not going to necessarily be as efficient, but it's
likely to be close.
-Steve
I've compared the range versions with a for-loop. For integers
and longs or high stride amounts the time is roughly equal, but
for bytes with low stride amounts it can be up to twice as slow.
https://run.dlang.io/is/BoTflQ
50 Mb array, type = byte, stride = 3, compiler = LDC -O4
-release
For-loop 18 ms
Fill(0) 33 ms
each! 33 ms
With stride = 13:
For-loop 7.3 ms
Fill(0) 7.5 ms
each! 7.8 ms
This is why I wanted to make sure! I would be using it for a
stride of 2 and it seems it might have doubled the cost for no
other reason than using ranged. Ranges are great but one can't
reason about what is happening in then as easy as a direct loop
so I wanted to be sure. Thanks for running the test!
