Re: Profiling support?

Thomas Rast [off-list ref] writes:

David Kastrup [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Thomas Rast [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

David Kastrup [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Looking in the Makefile, I just find support for coverage reports using
gcov.  Whatever is there with "profile" in it seems to be for
profile-based compilation rather than using gprof.

[...]

quoted

Is there a reason there are no prewired recipes or advice for using
gprof on git?  Is there a way to get the work done, namely seeing the
actual distribution of call times (rather than iterations) using gcov so
that this is not necessary?

No reason I'm aware of, other than that nobody ever wrote it.

A solid testing/benchmarking framework would quite seem like a useful
GSoC project as it would make it easy for casual programmers to dip
their feet into their personal bottlenecks, and it would make it much
easier to find worthwhile hotspots for future projects taking the
challenge of speeding up core and/or specific operations.

quoted

Note that I wouldn't exactly be surprised if the gcov targets had
bitrotted without anyone noticing.  I haven't heard of any heavy users.
I originally wrote them to do some basic test coverage analysis, but
that's about it.

I've managed to make use of the outer sandwich layers: the prepare and
the evaluate stuff.  I ran my own tests for benchmarking though.

Umm, are we even discussing the same thing here?

Maybe not.

Are you saying you ran profiling-instrumented code under the t/perf/
support code?

No.  I used the toplevel Makefile targets coverage-clean,
coverage-compile and, after running my own problematic test cases,
coverage-report.  I did not use the coverage-test target, nor did I
venture into t/perf/ in any other way.

-- 
David Kastrup