Ok, not much time right now, but we will look into it.
2011/7/21 Maciej Fijalkowski :
> On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Antonio Cuni wrote:
>> On 21/07/11 10:02, Miquel Torres wrote:
>>> Alternatively, the timeline view could allow to display several
>>> environments at the same time...
>>
>>
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Antonio Cuni wrote:
> On 21/07/11 10:02, Miquel Torres wrote:
>> Alternatively, the timeline view could allow to display several
>> environments at the same time...
>
> I think this would work. How hard is it to implement?
> Maciek, any opinion?
No, not much opini
On 21/07/11 10:02, Miquel Torres wrote:
> Alternatively, the timeline view could allow to display several
> environments at the same time...
I think this would work. How hard is it to implement?
Maciek, any opinion?
ciao,
Anto
___
pypy-dev mailing list
Alternatively, the timeline view could allow to display several
environments at the same time...
2011/7/21 Antonio Cuni :
> On 21/07/11 09:13, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
>> I think having them at the same graph is more important than having
>> changes showing correct things. I might give it a go i
Right. I think that the geometric average is useful mostly and
primarily to gather how PyPy is improving over time, and much less to
know whether it has yet reached the speed of light as compared to
CPython ;-)
2011/7/21 Maciej Fijalkowski :
> On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 7:17 AM, Stefan Behnel wrot
On 21/07/11 09:13, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
> I think having them at the same graph is more important than having
> changes showing correct things. I might give it a go if nobody wants
> to
Not sure. Having them in the same graph is important only to quickly spot
cases in which one backend is muc
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Antonio Cuni wrote:
> Hi Miquel, Maciek, all,
>
> On 20/07/11 22:01, Miquel Torres wrote:
>
>> Thanks Maciej. It was just a case of adding the new branch parameter
>> to the result dictionary, as you did in
>> pypy/benchmarks/src/saveresults
>
> I think that there
Hi Miquel, Maciek, all,
On 20/07/11 22:01, Miquel Torres wrote:
> Thanks Maciej. It was just a case of adding the new branch parameter
> to the result dictionary, as you did in
> pypy/benchmarks/src/saveresults
I think that there was another issue: currently we pass a revision number like
12345:
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 7:17 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Massa, Harald Armin, 18.07.2011 23:30:
>>
>> I recommend to wrap the code and release it with the subtitle "the 4 times
>> faster release"
>
> Just nitpicking here, but you shouldn't forget that any given set of
> benchmarks can only ever be
