Slower than Python

[deadalnix]

On Monday, 4 March 2013 at 04:36:30 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
> On 3/3/13 9:31 PM, deadalnix wrote:
>> On Sunday, 3 March 2013 at 20:18:58 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>>> On 3/3/2013 7:09 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>>>> On 2013-03-02 17:48, John Colvin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It does.
>>>>>
>>>>> Failing to beat mature, optimised C is not anything to be 
>>>>> ashamed of,
>>>>> but being slower than python would be an abject failure of 
>>>>> D as a
>>>>> compiled, systems programming language.
>>>>
>>>> Then D needs to get faster, or we need to switch to C for 
>>>> some std lib
>>>> functions. In that case, as Walter said, we have failed.
>>>
>>> Nothing in this thread suggests that D needs to switch its 
>>> library
>>> implementations to C.
>>>
>>> Interestingly, I tried the indexOf() benchmark using C's 
>>> memchr() and
>>> memcmp() from VC's runtime library. It was not faster than 
>>> Andrei's
>>> optimized D one.
>>
>> Maybe it is time to look at the python implementation and see 
>> why it is
>> faster.
>
> Was the conclusion that it's faster?
>
> Andrei

It seems that I was wrong, and missed the point that both 
benchmark weren't using the same string. Sorry for that.