parallel copy directory, faster than robocopy

[Jay Norwood]

On Monday, 5 March 2012 at 16:35:09 UTC, dennis luehring wrote:
>
> do you compare single-threaded robocopy with your 
> implementation or multithreaded?
>
> you can command robocopy to use multiple threads with /MT[:n]

yes, I tested vs multithread robocopy.  As someone pointed out, 
robocopy has lots of nice options, which I didn't try to 
duplicate, and is only about 10% slower on my test.

I was happy to see the D app in the same ballpark as robocopy, 
which means to me that the very simple and clean std.parallism 
taskpool foreach loop can produce very good multi-core results in 
a very concise and readable piece of code.  I've done some 
projects previously using omp pragmas in C++ and it is just so 
ugly.