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

Auto Scale units #2

Closed
PragTob opened this issue Jun 18, 2016 · 3 comments
Closed

Auto Scale units #2

PragTob opened this issue Jun 18, 2016 · 3 comments

Comments

@PragTob
Copy link
Member

PragTob commented Jun 18, 2016

It’d be nice to for instance show the average time in milliseconds if a benchmark is slower or write something to the effect of “80.9 Million” iterations per second for the console output for a fast benchmark.

It'd be important to me this auto scaling takes into account all results. I.e. I always find it harder to compare when results are reported in different units so either the values of (for instance) all averages are scaled to the same unit/magnitude or none are.

@wasnotrice
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi @PragTob 👋

I was just doing something similar with unit formatting in an app I'm working on, and I saw your recent tweet. I would love to contribute to this issue since I'm in thinking about it. Would you like me to start in on this, and we can work through the details as we go?

Any other considerations you want to think about ("M" vs "Million", etc)?

@PragTob
Copy link
Member Author

PragTob commented Sep 13, 2016

Hey @wasnotrice 🎉 ❤️ ❤️ 💚 💛 💚 💚 ❤️ ❤️ 🎉

Of course, so nice to see you here :)

M/Million, B/Billion was definitely something I was thinking about, although I often find it to be somewhat confusing but Million/Billion is long. So I'm torn. I was also thinking about doing iterations/100ms or iterations/1ms instead but think it might be even more counter intuitive.

In a later step (just as a hint) I think I'd also want to turn on/off auto scaling (like other options), but that's easily/gladly another PR.

As always (or back in the days :) ), glad for early PRs, reviewing and working it out as we go :)

@wasnotrice wasnotrice mentioned this issue Sep 15, 2016
4 tasks
@wasnotrice
Copy link
Collaborator

Closed by #26

See #27, #28 for related features

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants