mirror/fmt
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/fmtlib/fmt.git synced 2024-12-24 12:14:26 +00:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Update benchmark results.

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Victor Zverovich 2014-05-22 06:08:50 -07:00
parent 3e4eded5b2
commit f561a7b0e8
1 changed files with 31 additions and 31 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

62
README.rst
View File

@ -260,45 +260,45 @@ Performance of format is close to that of printf.
Compile time and code bloat
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The script `bloat_test.sh
<https://github.com/cppformat/format-benchmark/blob/master/bloat_test.sh>`__
from `tinyformat <https://github.com/c42f/tinyformat>`__ tests compile time
and code bloat for nontrivial projects. It generates 100 translation units
and uses ``printf()`` or its alternative five times in each to simulate
a medium sized project. The resulting executable size and compile time
(g++-4.7.2, Ubuntu GNU/Linux 12.10, best of three) is shown in the following
tables.
**Non-optimized build**
====================== ================== ==========================
test name total compile time executable size (stripped)
====================== ================== ==========================
libc printf 2.8s 44K (32K)
std::ostream 12.9s 84K (60K)
format 16.0s 152K (128K)
tinyformat 20.6s 240K (200K)
boost::format 76.0s 888K (780K)
====================== ================== ==========================
The script `bloat_test.py
<https://github.com/cppformat/format-benchmark/blob/master/bloat-test.py>`__
from `format-benchmark <https://github.com/cppformat/format-benchmark>`__
tests compile time and code bloat for nontrivial projects.
It generates 100 translation units and uses ``printf()`` or its alternative
five times in each to simulate a medium sized project. The resulting
executable size and compile time (g++-4.8.1, Ubuntu GNU/Linux 13.10,
best of three) is shown in the following tables.
**Optimized build (-O3)**
====================== ================== ==========================
test name total compile time executable size (stripped)
====================== ================== ==========================
libc printf 3.5s 40K (28K)
std::ostream 14.1s 88K (64K)
format 25.1s 552K (536K)
tinyformat 56.3s 200K (164K)
boost::format 169.4s 1.7M (1.6M)
libc printf 2.5 42K (31K)
IOStreams 19.8 86K (64K)
C++ Format 48.8 103K (84K)
tinyformat 65.0 428K (396K)
Boost Format 212.0 1014K (945K)
====================== ================== ==========================
Printf and std::ostream win here which is not surprising considering
that they are included in the standard library. Tinyformat has somewhat
slower compilation times compared to format. Interestingly optimized
executable size is smaller with tinyformat then with format and for
non-optimized build its the other way around. Boost::format has by far
the largest overheads.
**Non-optimized build**
====================== ================== ==========================
test name total compile time executable size (stripped)
====================== ================== ==========================
libc printf 2.1s 42K (31K)
IOStreams 17.3s 84K (60K)
C++ Format 42.7s 167K (138K)
tinyformat 25.1s 239K (195K)
Boost Format 110.2s 905K (781K)
====================== ================== ==========================
IOStreams and printf win here which is not surprising considering that
they are included in the standard library. Tinyformat produces somewhat
larger executable sizes compared to C++ Format. Interestingly optimized
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.
Running the tests
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~