Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

continuous is not a good command name #225

Open
mdboom opened this issue Feb 17, 2015 · 5 comments
Open

continuous is not a good command name #225

mdboom opened this issue Feb 17, 2015 · 5 comments
Labels
idea Low-priority enhancement suggestion

Comments

@mdboom
Copy link
Collaborator

mdboom commented Feb 17, 2015

Particularly with #223, which adds the ability to choose a base that isn't necessarily the direct parent.

I vote for "pairwise" but I'm open to other suggestions.

Cc: @pv, @astrofrog

@mdboom mdboom changed the title continous is not a good command name continuous is not a good command name Feb 17, 2015
@astrofrog
Copy link
Contributor

Hmm, I guess that compare would have been a good choice but already taken by the other command with the same name that I wrote 😉

pairwise sounds good, and another suggestion would be diff

@pv
Copy link
Collaborator

pv commented Feb 17, 2015

Or rename compare to diff (which is also the unix command doing the same thing) and then rename continuous to compare?

@jorisvandenbossche
Copy link

More a question (but asking here instead of in a new issue), but what is actually the difference between continuous and compare? As, for me, this is not fully clear from the docs.
OK, there are some different arguments (continuous supports selecting benchmarks with -b while compare not, continuous also supports specifying branches while compare only commits), but what is the supposed difference from a higher level?

@pv
Copy link
Collaborator

pv commented Oct 18, 2015

Continuous runs the benchmarks, compare uses existing results.

@jorisvandenbossche
Copy link

Aha, that's a big difference :-)
When I now read the docs again ("Compare two sets of results"), this is indeed what is said there, but maybe this can be put a bit more explicit.

@pv pv added the enhancement Triaged as an enhancement request label Jun 19, 2017
@pv pv added the idea Low-priority enhancement suggestion label Jun 1, 2019
@pv pv removed the enhancement Triaged as an enhancement request label Jun 30, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
idea Low-priority enhancement suggestion
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants