Faster sort?

[tsbockman via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 7 April 2016 at 09:00:05 UTC, Andrea Fontana wrote:
> What about this?
>
>    Duration total;
>
>    foreach(_; 0..10000)
>    {
>       auto arr = generate!( () => uniform(0,2)).map!(x => 
> cast(bool)x).take(65536).array;
>       StopWatch sw;
>       sw.start;
>       auto t = boolSort(arr);
>       sw.stop;
>       size_t sum = 0;
>       foreach(x; t.map!(x => x?1:0)) sum+=x;
>       writeln(sum);
>    }
>
>    writeln(total);
>
> This outputs:
> 32784
> ...
> ...
> ...
> 32819
> 32648
> 32649
> 32716
> 32972
> 0 hnsecs

A time of "zero" means the benchmark is broken. In this case, you 
forgot to actually add the stopwatch time to the `total` variable.

You don't need to print the sum every time; just accumulate it in 
a variable declared outside the loop and print it once at the end 
(like with `total`). See my benchmark code that I posted a few 
minutes ago.