diff --git a/README.rst b/README.rst index 49c842b8..f56aa1bb 100644 --- a/README.rst +++ b/README.rst @@ -300,30 +300,44 @@ compile time is smaller for C++ Format than for tinyformat and its the other way around with non-optimized build. Boost Format has by far the largest overheads. +``libc``, ``libstdc++`` and ``libformat`` 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. + Running the tests ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -To run the tests you first need to get the source code by cloning the -repository:: +To run the unit tests first get the source code by cloning the repository:: - $ git clone git://github.com/cppformat/cppformat.git + $ git clone https://github.com/cppformat/cppformat.git or downloading a package from `Releases `__. -Then go to the format directory and generate Makefiles with -`CMake `__:: +Then go to the cppformat directory, generate Makefiles with +`CMake `__ and build the project:: $ cd cppformat $ cmake . + $ make -Next use the following commands to run the unit tests:: +Now you can run the unit tests:: $ make test -the speed test:: +Benchmarks reside in a separate repository, +`format-benchmarks `__, +so to run the benchmarks you first need to clone this repository and +build the code:: - $ make speed_test + $ git clone --recursive https://github.com/cppformat/format-benchmark.git + $ cd format-benchmark + $ cmake . + +Then you can run the speed test:: + + $ make speed-test or the bloat test::