You cannot select more than 25 topics Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.

Daniel Martí f497821174 redesign benchmark to be more useful and realistic ... First, join the two benchmarks into one. The previous "cached" benchmark was borderline pointless, as it built the same package with the existing output binary, so it would quickly realise it had nothing to do and take ~100ms. The previous "noncached" benchmark input had no dependencies, so it was only really benchmarking the non-obfuscation of the runtime. All in all, neither benchmark measured obfuscating multiple packages. The new benchmark reuses the "cached" input, but with GOCACHE="*", meaning that we now obfuscate dozens of standard library packages. Each iteration first does a built from scratch, the worst case scenario, and then does an incremental rebuild of just the main package, which is the closest to a best case scenario without being a no-op. Since each iteration now performs both kinds of builds, we include a new "cached-time" metric to report what portion of the "time" metric corresponds to the incremental build. Thus, we can see a clean build takes ~11s, and a cached takes ~0.3s: name time/op Build-16 11.6s ± 1% name bin-B Build-16 5.34M ± 0% name cached-time/op Build-16 326ms ± 5% name sys-time/op Build-16 184ms ±13% name user-time/op Build-16 611ms ± 5% The benchmark is also no logner parallel; see the docs. Note that the old benchmark also reported bin-B incorrectly, as it looked at the binary size of garble itself, not the input program.		2 years ago
..
main.go	redesign benchmark to be more useful and realistic	2 years ago