Skip to content

Conversation

@haya14busa
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

benchmark old ns/op new ns/op delta BenchmarkVimLParser_VimLParser-4 522557385 384606362 -26.40%
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-0.02%) to 81.585% when pulling ce9df41 on performance into 91d84c9 on master.

1 similar comment
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-0.02%) to 81.585% when pulling ce9df41 on performance into 91d84c9 on master.

before: . . 140:func viml_split(s string, sep string) []string{. . 141: if sep == `\zs`{. . 142: var ss []string . . 143: for _, r := range s{58.05MB 58.05MB 144: ss = append(ss, string(r)) . . 145: } . . 146: return ss . . 147: } . . 148: panic("NotImplemented viml_split") . . 149:} after: . . 140:func viml_split(s string, sep string) []string{. . 141: if sep == `\zs`{21.02MB 21.02MB 142: ss := make([]string, 0, len(s)) . . 143: for _, r := range s{4MB 4MB 144: ss = append(ss, string(r)) . . 145: } . . 146: return ss . . 147: } . . 148: panic("NotImplemented viml_split") . . 149:}
…erface{}{lnum, col} benchmark old ns/op new ns/op delta BenchmarkVimLParser_VimLParser-4 366894571 295205749 -19.54%
benchmark old ns/op new ns/op delta BenchmarkVimLParser_VimLParser-4 295205749 262219875 -11.17%
benchmark old ns/op new ns/op delta BenchmarkVimLParser_VimLParser-4 262219875 248887206 -5.08%
benchmark old ns/op new ns/op delta BenchmarkVimLParser_VimLParser-4 248887206 235228838 -5.49%
@haya14busa
Copy link
MemberAuthor

# benchcmp mem.0 mem.8 (git)-[performance] benchmark old ns/op new ns/op delta BenchmarkVimLParser_VimLParser-4 522557385 239071919 -54.25% 

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.03%) to 81.626% when pulling 71f910d on performance into 91d84c9 on master.

1 similar comment
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.03%) to 81.626% when pulling 71f910d on performance into 91d84c9 on master.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.03%) to 81.626% when pulling 1dc4167 on performance into 91d84c9 on master.

1 similar comment
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.03%) to 81.626% when pulling 1dc4167 on performance into 91d84c9 on master.

@haya14busa
Copy link
MemberAuthor

Benchmarks

$ pwd /home/haya14busa/src/github.com/ynkdir/vim-vimlparser $ git rev-parse HEAD 2fff43c58968a18bc01bc8304df68bde01af04d9 $ wc -l < autoload/vimlparser.vim 5195 $ time vim -u NONE -N --cmd "let &rtp .= ',' . getcwd()" --cmd "silent call vimlparser#test('autoload/vimlparser.vim')" -c ":q" vim -u NONE -N --cmd "let &rtp .= ',' . getcwd()" --cmd -c ":q" 48.88s user 0.05s system 99% cpu 48.942 total $ python3 -V Python 3.5.0 $ time python3 py/vimlparser.py autoload/vimlparser.vim > /dev/null python3 py/vimlparser.py autoload/vimlparser.vim > /dev/null 4.17s user 0.04s system 99% cpu 4.236 total $ pypy3 -V Python 3.2.5 (b2091e973da69152b3f928bfaabd5d2347e6df46, Mar 04 2016, 07:08:30) [PyPy 2.4.0 with GCC 5.3.0] $ time pypy3 py/vimlparser.py autoload/vimlparser.vim > /dev/null pypy3 py/vimlparser.py autoload/vimlparser.vim > /dev/null 2.63s user 0.06s system 99% cpu 2.694 total $ node --version v4.2.3 $ time node js/vimlparser.js autoload/vimlparser.vim > /dev/null node js/vimlparser.js autoload/vimlparser.vim > /dev/null 0.77s user 0.04s system 125% cpu 0.644 total $ go get github.com/haya14busa/go-vimlparser/cmd/vimlparser $ time vimlparser autoload/vimlparser.vim > /dev/null vimlparser autoload/vimlparser.vim > /dev/null 0.36s user 0.02s system 125% cpu 0.299 total
LanguageTime (sec)
Vim script48.88s
Python3 (3.5.0)4.17s
pypy32.63s
node0.77s
go0.36s

Something Extra

$ pwd /home/haya14busa/src/github.com/haya14busa/go-vimlparser $ git rev-parse HEAD db7e1558c2c9a2a85b8b61bbfd2550f348b5677e $ time go run cmd/vimlparser/main.go ../../ynkdir/vim-vimlparser/autoload/vimlparser.vim > /dev/null go run cmd/vimlparser/main.go > /dev/null 0.54s user 0.08s system 124% cpu 0.491 total

Go is the fastest even with compile time.

@haya14busahaya14busa merged commit 33fd88f into masterSep 14, 2016
@haya14busahaya14busa deleted the performance branch September 14, 2016 15:45
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@haya14busa@coveralls