> here is the results with chris’ suggestion. (thanks chris)
Much better, thanks!
> still a bit noise on only load and load_advances. are results
> acceptable?
As far as I can see, the biggest differences occur if the 'Baseline'
and 'Benchmark' columns contain very small values. I still
> As I was testing my attempt at supporting GSUB lookups, I found that
> hb_ot_layout_lookup_collect_glyphs, is actually not what I need,
> because I assumed that each lookup contains exactly one
> substitution, when it actually may contain multiple. What I really
> need is a way to get each
> I still think that for such cases the number of iterations of the affected
> tests should be increased to get more precise values.
the times are for single iteration. (chunk median/chunk size)
> Please separate this line slightly from the rest of the table
> and print the *cumulated timing* (in
>> I still think that for such cases the number of iterations of the
>> affected tests should be increased to get more precise values.
>
> the times are for single iteration. (chunk median/chunk size)
Yes, but the number of iterations is the same regardless whether a
test takes 10µs or 1000µs –
hi,
here is the results with chris’ suggestion. (thanks chris)
i will check hyperfine.
still a bit noise on only load and load_advances.
are results acceptable?
Best,
Goksu
goksu.in
On 28 Aug 2023 21:19 +0300, Werner LEMBERG , wrote:
>
> code
Freetype Benchmark Results
Warning: Baseline and
