Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 14:25:06 -0800 From: Eric Pruitt <eric.pruitt@...il.com> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Updating Unicode support On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 04:48:53PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote: > > I updated my copy of musl to 1.1.18 then recompiled it with and without > > my utf8proc changes using GCC 6.3.0 "-O3" targeting Linux 4.9.0 / > > x86_64: > > > > - Original implementation: 2,762,774B (musl-1.1.18/lib/libc.a) > > - utf8proc implementation: 3,055,954B (musl-1.1.18/lib/libc.a) > > - The utf8proc implementation is ~11% larger. I didn't do any > > performance comparisons. > > You're comparing the whole library, not character tables. If you > compare against all of ctype, it's a 15x size increase. If you compare > against just wcwidth, it's a 69x increase. That was intentional. I have no clue what the common case is for other people that use musl, but most applications **I** use make use of various parts of musl, so I did the comparison on the library as a whole. Eric
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.