D easily overlooked?

[Seb via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 21 July 2017 at 13:50:24 UTC, Joakim wrote:
> On Friday, 21 July 2017 at 13:25:32 UTC, Adrian Matoga wrote:
>> On Friday, 14 July 2017 at 13:29:30 UTC, Joakim wrote:
>>> [...]
>>
>> Interesting. A few months ago I wanted to sell ctRegex as the 
>> fastest one in a presentation, but in my benchmarks (based on 
>> [1]) I found it to be of equal speed or slower than 
>> boost::regex (LDC vs Clang).
>>
>> I've got to take a look at your benchmarks, and repeat mine to 
>> check again if I didn't mess something up.
>>
>> [1] http://lh3lh3.users.sourceforge.net/reb.shtml
>
> The boost C++ benchmark run in the link I gave says it's more 
> than 10X slower than the top C one I found D to be faster than, 
> so I didn't bother with it.  Maybe you can speed it up:
>
> http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/program.php?test=regexredux&lang=gpp&id=3
>
> As for your benchmark, I'd be surprised if ctRegex wouldn't 
> beat out Boost given how well it does against the faster PCRE 
> in the fasta-dna one I tried, but all these microbenchmarks 
> only look at particular features of a full regex engine, so 
> it's always possible ctRegex is slower in others.

We disabled the Kickstart engine temporarily as there where 
issues with CTFE [1], this means that until newCTFE is out 
runtime will be faster in most cases and it won't perform nicely 
in benchmark. However, newCTFE is almost finished, and with a bit 
of luck we see it in master soon.

[1] https://github.com/dlang/phobos/pull/4995