Commit graph

4 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
BaaMeow 478eafa36b [JSON] add threads and repetitions to the json output (#748)
* [JSON] add threads and repetitions to the json output, for better ide…
[Tests] explicitly check for thread == 1
[Tests] specifically mark all repetition checks
[JSON] add repetition_index reporting, but only for non-aggregates (i…

* [Formatting] Be very, very explicit about pointer alignment so clang-format can not put pointers/references on the wrong side of arguments.
[Benchmark::Run] Make sure to use explanatory sentinel variable rather than a magic number.

* Do not pass redundant information
2019-03-26 09:53:07 +00:00
Roman Lebedev 507c06e636
Aggregates: use non-aggregate count as iteration count. (#706)
It is incorrect to say that an aggregate is computed over
run's iterations, because those iterations already got averaged.
Similarly, if there are N repetitions with 1 iterations each,
an aggregate will be computed over N measurements, not 1.
Thus it is best to simply use the count of separate reports.

Fixes #586.
2018-10-18 17:17:14 +03:00
Roman Lebedev 58588476ce
Track two more details about runs - the aggregate name, and run name. (#675)
This is related to @BaaMeow's work in https://github.com/google/benchmark/pull/616 but is not based on it.

Two new fields are tracked, and dumped into JSON:
* If the run is an aggregate, the aggregate's name is stored.
  It can be RMS, BigO, mean, median, stddev, or any custom stat name.
* The aggregate-name-less run name is additionally stored.
  I.e. not some name of the benchmark function, but the actual
  name, but without the 'aggregate name' suffix.

This way one can group/filter all the runs,
and filter by the particular aggregate type.

I *might* need this for further tooling improvement.
Or maybe not.
But this is certainly worthwhile for custom tooling.
2018-09-13 15:08:15 +03:00
Roman Lebedev caa2fcb19c
Counter(): add 'one thousand' param. (#657)
* Counter(): add 'one thousand' param.

Needed for https://github.com/google/benchmark/pull/654

Custom user counters are quite custom. It is not guaranteed
that the user *always* expects for these to have 1k == 1000.
If the counter represents bytes/memory/etc, 1k should be 1024.

Some bikeshedding points:
1. Is this sufficient, or do we really want to go full on
   into custom types with names?
   I think just the '1000' is sufficient for now.
2. Should there be a helper benchmark::Counter::Counter{1000,1024}()
   static 'constructor' functions, since these two, by far,
   will be the most used?
3. In the future, we should be somehow encoding this info into JSON.

* Counter(): use std::pair<> to represent 'one thousand'

* Counter(): just use a new enum with two values 1000 vs 1024.

Simpler is better. If someone comes up with a real reason
to need something more advanced, it can be added later on.

* Counter: just store the 1000 or 1024 in the One_K values directly

* Counter: s/One_K/OneK/
2018-08-29 21:11:06 +03:00