mirror of
https://github.com/shadps4-emu/ext-fmt.git
synced 2024-11-25 02:39:40 +00:00
Update README.rst
This commit is contained in:
parent
04a21bbb2e
commit
a95b3f7ee1
14
README.rst
14
README.rst
@ -269,18 +269,20 @@ further details see the `source
|
||||
============== ========
|
||||
test name run time
|
||||
============== ========
|
||||
libc printf 1.28s
|
||||
std::ostream 2.09s
|
||||
cppformat 1.32s
|
||||
tinyformat 2.55s
|
||||
boost::format 10.42s
|
||||
libc printf 1.30s
|
||||
std::ostream 1.85s
|
||||
cppformat 1.42s
|
||||
tinyformat 2.25s
|
||||
boost::format 9.94s
|
||||
============== ========
|
||||
|
||||
As you can see boost::format is much slower than the alternative methods; this
|
||||
is confirmed by `other tests <http://accu.org/index.php/journals/1539>`_.
|
||||
Tinyformat is quite good coming close to IOStreams. Unfortunately tinyformat
|
||||
cannot be faster than the IOStreams because it uses them internally.
|
||||
Performance of format is close to that of printf.
|
||||
Performance of cppformat is close to that of printf. cppformat is [faster on
|
||||
integer formatting](http://zverovich.net/2013/09/07/integer-to-string-conversion-in-cplusplus.html),
|
||||
but slower on floating-point formatting which dominates this benchmark.
|
||||
|
||||
Compile time and code bloat
|
||||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user