Reduce has dreadful performance?

Martin Nowak via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Sat Jun 20 08:07:57 PDT 2015


On Thursday, 18 June 2015 at 18:55:25 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
> Loop: 3.14s
> Reduce 1: 4.76s
> Reduce 2: 5.12s
>
> This is DMD 2.067

Don't compare performance numbers on dmd, particularly not when 
assessing abstraction overhead.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list