On 6/18/15 2:04 PM, weaselcat wrote:
On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 20:53:20 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 6/18/2015 7:04 AM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote:
Now I get
Loop: 3.14s
Reduce 1: 4.76s
Reduce 2: 5.12s
I expect that at the moment, range+algorithms code will likely be
somewhat slower than old fashioned loops. This is because code
generators have been tuned for decades to do a great job with loops.
There's no intrinsic reason why ranges must do worse, so I expect
they'll achieve parity.
Ranges can move ahead because they can reduce the algorithmic
complexity, whereas user written loops tend to be suboptimal.
ldc and gdc have no issue optimizing the range code(range code is
actually faster with ldc)
Russel, do you have numbers for ldc by any chance? Thx! -- Andrei
