stride in slices

[DigitalDesigns]

On Monday, 4 June 2018 at 17:40:57 UTC, Dennis wrote:
> On Monday, 4 June 2018 at 15:43:20 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer 
> wrote:
>> Note, it's not going to necessarily be as efficient, but it's 
>> likely to be close.
>>
>> -Steve
>
> I've compared the range versions with a for-loop. For integers 
> and longs or high stride amounts the time is roughly equal, but 
> for bytes with low stride amounts it can be up to twice as slow.
> https://run.dlang.io/is/BoTflQ
>
> 50 Mb array, type = byte, stride = 3, compiler = LDC -O4 
> -release
> For-loop  18 ms
> Fill(0)   33 ms
> each!     33 ms
>
> With stride = 13:
> For-loop  7.3 ms
> Fill(0)   7.5 ms
> each!     7.8 ms


This is why I wanted to make sure! I would be using it for a 
stride of 2 and it seems it might have doubled the cost for no 
other reason than using ranged. Ranges are great but one can't 
reason about what is happening in then as easy as a direct loop 
so I wanted to be sure. Thanks for running the test!