From C++14 and Java 1.8

[Martin Nowak]

On 04/21/2013 04:46 PM, dsimcha wrote:
> 2.  Different hardware than I tested on, maybe with better memory
> bandwidth.

Your implementation performs a lot of copying. Maybe an in-place 
parallel sort algorithm would perform better, e.g. parallel quicksort.


> 3.  Expensive comparison functions.  I didn't test this in D either
> because I couldn't think of a good use case.  I tested the D parallel
> sort using small primitive types (ints and floats and stuff).

String sorting is a good use case with slightly higher comparison cost.