Re: [boost] Re: Performance: shared_ptr

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-18 08:38:57

Matthew Wilson wrote:
>>
>> Would it be possible for you to share the source of the benchmarks?
>
> Certainly. What would you advise: would it be ok to just send to you
> via email, or do you want me to post the whole hideous heap here?
> There is a certain amount of swill to be had.
>
> 1. There's a lot of STLSoft stuff in there, for the timings, and
> whatnot. (I don't think that's swill, of course, but still there's a
> fair amount of stuff needed)
> 2. There's a fair bit of very old, and *very* swillsome, Synesis
> code. If I let you have it, you must promise not to consider it
> representative of anything other than another lifetime, where both
> programmers and compilers were a lot less intelligent.

Well. I've been thinking about including the tests in Boost, in
libs/smart_ptr/test, where currently shared_ptr_timing_test.cpp,
shared_ptr_alloc_test.cpp and shared_ptr_mt_test.cpp reside. When
benchmarking it is common courtesy to make the source publicly available so
that the results can be reproduced by others.

If you have the time, it would probably be best if you could try the Boost
tests first, to see if the results are consistent with your own. When there
is a difference, we should probably use one of the Boost tests as a
threading/timing framework and just replace the scenario being tested, to
avoid the Synesis/STLSoft dependencies.