From 4cddbfa7cfc28976576db514981a513d3ad5b10f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Victor Zverovich Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 06:36:26 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] Update README.rst --- README.rst | 18 +++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/README.rst b/README.rst index b495c78f..f311b2ed 100644 --- a/README.rst +++ b/README.rst @@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ Arguments can be accessed by position and arguments' indices can be repeated: std::string s = fmt::format("{0}{1}{0}", "abra", "cad"); // s == "abracadabra" -C++ Format can be used as a safe portable replacement for ``itoa``: +fmt can be used as a safe portable replacement for ``itoa``: .. code:: c++ @@ -288,7 +288,7 @@ Library Method Run Time, s ================= ============= =========== EGLIBC 2.19 printf 1.30 libstdc++ 4.8.2 std::ostream 1.85 -C++ Format 1.0 fmt::print 1.42 +fmt 1.0 fmt::print 1.42 tinyformat 2.0.1 tfm::printf 2.25 Boost Format 1.54 boost::format 9.94 ================= ============= =========== @@ -297,7 +297,7 @@ As you can see ``boost::format`` is much slower than the alternative methods; th is confirmed by `other tests `_. Tinyformat is quite good coming close to IOStreams. Unfortunately tinyformat cannot be faster than the IOStreams because it uses them internally. -Performance of **fmt** is close to that of printf, being `faster than printf on integer +Performance of fmt is close to that of printf, being `faster than printf on integer formatting `_, but slower on floating-point formatting which dominates this benchmark. @@ -320,12 +320,12 @@ Method Compile Time, s Executable size, KiB Stripped size, KiB ============ =============== ==================== ================== printf 2.6 41 30 IOStreams 19.4 92 70 -C++ Format 46.8 46 34 +fmt 46.8 46 34 tinyformat 64.6 418 386 Boost Format 222.8 990 923 ============ =============== ==================== ================== -As you can see, C++ Format has two times less overhead in terms of resulting +As you can see, fmt has two times less overhead in terms of resulting code size compared to IOStreams and comes pretty close to ``printf``. Boost Format has by far the largest overheads. @@ -336,12 +336,12 @@ Method Compile Time, s Executable size, KiB Stripped size, KiB ============ =============== ==================== ================== printf 2.1 41 30 IOStreams 19.7 86 62 -C++ Format 47.9 108 86 +fmt 47.9 108 86 tinyformat 27.7 234 190 Boost Format 122.6 884 763 ============ =============== ==================== ================== -``libc``, ``libstdc++`` and ``libformat`` are all linked as shared +``libc``, ``libstdc++`` and ``libfmt`` are all linked as shared libraries to compare formatting function overhead only. Boost Format and tinyformat are header-only libraries so they don't provide any linkage options. @@ -374,7 +374,7 @@ or the bloat test:: License ------- -C++ Format is distributed under the BSD `license +fmt is distributed under the BSD `license `_. The `Format String Syntax @@ -385,7 +385,7 @@ adapted for the current library. For this reason the documentation is distributed under the Python Software Foundation license available in `doc/python-license.txt `_. -It only applies if you distribute the documentation of C++ Format. +It only applies if you distribute the documentation of fmt. Acknowledgments ---------------