On Sun, 24 Sep 2023 20:27:53 GMT, 温绍锦 <d...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> @cl4es made performance optimizations for the simple specifiers of >> String.format in PR https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/2830. Based on the >> same idea, I continued to make improvements. I made patterns like %2d %02d >> also be optimized. >> >> The following are the test results based on MacBookPro M1 Pro: >> >> >> -Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units >> -StringFormat.complexFormat avgt 15 1862.233 ? 217.479 ns/op >> -StringFormat.int02Format avgt 15 312.491 ? 26.021 ns/op >> -StringFormat.intFormat avgt 15 84.432 ? 4.145 ns/op >> -StringFormat.longFormat avgt 15 87.330 ? 6.111 ns/op >> -StringFormat.stringFormat avgt 15 63.985 ? 11.366 ns/op >> -StringFormat.stringIntFormat avgt 15 87.422 ? 0.147 ns/op >> -StringFormat.widthStringFormat avgt 15 250.740 ? 32.639 ns/op >> -StringFormat.widthStringIntFormat avgt 15 312.474 ? 16.309 ns/op >> >> +Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units >> +StringFormat.complexFormat avgt 15 740.626 ? 66.671 ns/op >> (+151.45) >> +StringFormat.int02Format avgt 15 131.049 ? 0.432 ns/op >> (+138.46) >> +StringFormat.intFormat avgt 15 67.229 ? 4.155 ns/op >> (+25.59) >> +StringFormat.longFormat avgt 15 66.444 ? 0.614 ns/op >> (+31.44) >> +StringFormat.stringFormat avgt 15 62.619 ? 4.652 ns/op >> (+2.19) >> +StringFormat.stringIntFormat avgt 15 89.606 ? 13.966 ns/op >> (-2.44) >> +StringFormat.widthStringFormat avgt 15 52.462 ? 15.649 ns/op >> (+377.95) >> +StringFormat.widthStringIntFormat avgt 15 101.814 ? 3.147 ns/op >> (+206.91) > > 温绍锦 has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit > since the last revision: > > fix logic error int parse(List<FormatString> al, char first, int start, String s, int max) java.util.Formatter::parse (469 bytes) failed to inline: callee is too large The reason why I split it into multiple small methods is to avoid a single method codeSize > 325. After merging small methods, the performance will decrease. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15776#issuecomment-1733490226
