Re: ftbench: last updates

2023-09-30 Thread Ahmet Göksu
hey, i have done the changes you want forcing to push the repo. i am used vscode whitespace settings, is there any other mistakes to fix? Best, Goksu goksu.in On Sep 25, 2023 at 7:33 PM +0300, Werner LEMBERG , wrote: > > > I hope my effort contribute to you. I wish to see you again. > > :-) You

Re: ftbench: last updates

2023-09-25 Thread Werner LEMBERG
> I hope my effort contribute to you. I wish to see you again. :-) You are invited to continue your work even after GSoC has ended. > Here is my last version of readme, [...] Uh, oh, the formatting in the e-mail is completely broken... > i will push submit my final submission regarding your

Re: ftbench: last updates

2023-09-25 Thread Ahmet Göksu
Thanks a lot :) I hope my effort contribute to you. I wish to see you again. Here is my last version of readme, i will push submit my final submission regarding your feedback. (also waiting for *-demos code review, i will push them too) > > > ftbench > ftbench is a program designed to

Re: ftbench: last updates

2023-09-24 Thread Werner LEMBERG
Hello Ahmet, sorry for the late reply, I'm travelling right now. > -Made documentation and comment line (will continue). Very nice! Some minor nits, in case you have still time today: * Please ensure that lines in the documentation are not longer than 78 characters

Re: ftbench: last updates

2023-09-21 Thread Ahmet Göksu
Hi, I have created a new branch. Here you can see it:  https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/freetype/freetype/-/tree/gsoc-2023-ahmet-final -Made documentation and comment line (will continue). -trailing whitespaces cleared -more verbose commit messages -formatted the code. In this version of the code,

Re: ftbench: last updates

2023-09-18 Thread Werner LEMBERG
Hello Ahmet, > -I have changed the * and the sentence Thanks. Unfortunately, I was unclear that '*x*' in my e-mail is meant as Markdown syntax and not to be taken verbatim. In other words, 'x' should be typeset in italics, similar to a mathematical variable. Sorry for that, and please fix.

Re: ftbench: last updates

2023-09-17 Thread Ahmet Göksu
Thanks Hin-Tak, I will create a README and enhance the comments inside of the codes and Makefile being guided by docguide and ftrandom (another function inside of the src/tools) documentation. Best, Goksu goksu.in On 17 Sep 2023 22:23 +0300, Hin-Tak Leung , wrote: > Hi Ahmet. I'll leave Werner

Re: ftbench: last updates

2023-09-17 Thread Hin-Tak Leung
Hi Ahmet. I'll leave Werner to say something definitive, but in my opinion, given the project will be put aside and/or merge with some incomplete area soon, for some possibly long period before you or somebody else revisit the tasks/goals, it is particularly important to document things

Re: ftbench: last updates

2023-09-17 Thread Ahmet Göksu
Thanks Hin-Tak, I am developing on a Mac. Also, While there are less than 10 days for final evaluation, there are points that are not completed: *meson *cmake *documentation because of our focus a bit changed, didnt worked on them much. Should I complete them all? Is there a priority? Best,

Re: ftbench: last updates

2023-09-16 Thread Hin-Tak Leung
I just remember something - the windows' implementation of ANSI / POSIX timing routines are especially poor - e.g.https://stackoverflow.com/questions/18346879/timer-accuracy-c-clock-vs-winapis-qpc-or-timegettime So unfortunately if you are trying to measure time on Windows accurately, you

Re: ftbench: last updates

2023-09-16 Thread Ahmet Göksu
Hello, -I have changed the * and the sentence -changed the links to relative > I already changed the working way of the timing. I only start the > benchmark at beginning and stop at the end. i mean, it times chunks, not single iteration.timer starts at the beginning of the chunk and stop at the

Re: ftbench: last updates

2023-09-12 Thread Werner LEMBERG
>> With 'bulk test' I mean that you don't time single iterations but >> do timings for 10 iterations in a group, say, thus avoiding >> issues with the granularity of the OS timing functions. > > I already changed the working way of the timing. I only start the > benchmark at beginning and stop