Slower than Python

[cvk012c]

On Saturday, 2 March 2013 at 00:47:02 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer 
wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Mar 2013 19:19:35 -0500, cvk012c 
> <cvk012c at motorolasolutions.com> wrote:
>
>> On Friday, 1 March 2013 at 21:52:13 UTC, bearophile wrote:
>>> cvk012c:
>>>
>>>> I think that similar Perl and Java scripts will outperform D 
>>>> easily.
>>>> Thanks Andrei and simendsjo for a quick response though.
>>>
>>> Why don't you write a Java version? It takes only few 
>>> minutes, and you will have one more data point.
>>>
>>
>> You are right. Why not. But instead of using Java split() 
>> method I used combination of indexOf() and substring() methods 
>> to do the same job. The reason: Java split method implemented 
>> as a regular expression which will be unfair to compare to D 
>> splitter. Again, I created a similar D version of the script, 
>> compiled it with all suggested options:  -release -O -inline 
>> -noboundscheck and this time D version is more then twice 
>> slower than Java: 8.4 seconds vs 4.
>> D experts, please, take a look at my code and tell me what is 
>> wrong with it.
>
> The issue is a combination of the fact that:
> 1. splitter is designed for any range, not just strings.  Not 
> an excuse really, but a string-specific version could be 
> written that does better (clearly).

In my latest version of D script I didn't use splitter at all. I 
used string specific indexOf function. Still result is very bad. 
For text based protocols, such as SIP, performance of string 
manipulating functions is very important. Unfortunately, looks 
like it is not D strongest point at this time.