-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 21
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Support "repeat N times and show the average" #4
Comments
I think the first step is to add |
I'll brush up on my stats and look into implementations. I think we'd get better results by just running Esup n times, but having the Emacs Frame appear multiple times would get old. Looking into the issue, I don't think we can just re-benchmark sexps in the same emacs. It won't work for code that only executes once, like (loop for i from 1 to 5
collect (benchmark-run (require 'ruby-mode)) into results
finally return results)
;; This returns the below on my machine:
((0.007 0 0.0) (0.0 0 0.0) (0.0 0 0.0) (0.0 0 0.0) (0.0 0 0.0)) Only the first iteration takes any time. |
The default should probably be to run just once, but for people that want better statistics, running multiple times could be an option. But honestly, this probably isn't a high-priority thing. |
By the way, another consideration is that some people auto-compile their init files, so it would make sense to have an option to run the init once and throw away the results and then do the real run, to get the results for an already-compiled init. |
So, are you suggesting that we compare the byte-compiled vs interpreted On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 7:46 PM, Ryan C. Thompson notifications@github.com
|
No, I'm just suggesting that it would be useful to be able to run the init process once and throw away the result, and then run it for real a second time and keep the results. |
Okay, I'll take a look next week. On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Ryan C. Thompson notifications@github.com
|
So, my week estimate was waaaay off. I don't think I can implement this without rewriting significant parts of the code and I'm not sure that the added complexity would justify getting an average. I'm gonna close it, but if there's significant interest I'll take another look. |
Yeah, that's pretty much the conclusion I came to after looking at it. No problem. |
Startup times can be unstable. It would be nice to be able to repeat the startup several times and take the average to get a more stable estimate (and maybe also the standard deviation).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: