Getting blank output, not quite sure why?

[lloydmeta]

Hi there,

Thanks for writing this cool tool :) I'm new to Rust, so please excuse any stupid questions.

I'm trying to use benchcmp with my lib, Frunk, using the following:

$ rustup run nightly cargo bench > benches-control && rustup run nightly cargo bench > benches-variable
#.. then 
$ cargo benchcmp benches-control benches-variable

I understand that benchmarking on the same branch will yield zero (or close to) differences, and my intention is to use benchcmp to compare performance before and after applying a PR, so I'll switch branches in between during actual usage.

Unfortunately the second command yields no output and I'm not sure why ? My benches are here, located in a separate directory.

Thanks in advance for your help,

Lloyd

[BurntSushi]

Can you please include the benchmark outputs so that we can more easily
reproduce your problem?

On Oct 24, 2016 12:47 AM, "Lloyd" notifications@github.com wrote:

Hi there,

Thanks for writing this cool tool :) I'm new to Rust, so please excuse any
stupid questions.

I'm trying to use benchcmp with my lib, Frunk
https://github.com/lloydmeta/frunk, using the following:

$ rustup run nightly cargo bench > benches-control && rustup run nightly cargo bench > benches-variable
// .. then
$ cargo benchcmp benches-control benches-variable

I understand that benchmarking on the same branch will yield zero (or
close to) differences, and my intention is to use benchcmp to compare
performance before and after applying a PR, so I'll switch branches in
between during actual usage.

Unfortunately the second command yields no output and I'm not sure why ?
My benches are here
https://github.com/lloydmeta/frunk/tree/master/benches, located in a
separate directory.

Thanks in advance for your help,

Lloyd

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#26, or mute the
thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAb34qzah9ZCujLe0OjY5yIhzySRK6w5ks5q3DhpgaJpZM4KeZDL
.

[lloydmeta]

Sure thing:

• Control results
• Variable results

[BurntSushi]

I think this should be fixed in 0.1.5. It looks like this was a regression introduced by #21. I've backed that change out.

[lloydmeta]

@BurntSushi thanks for that. Just gave 0.1.5 a try and can confirm it works fine.