On Sat, 2024-03-23 at 14:24 -0500, Karlin High wrote: > On 3/23/2024 2:00 PM, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote: > > Would be interesting to see how this compares to the "vanilla" package > > I tried it, 3 runs. First one maybe unfair because font cache > initialization or something. > > real 0m48.643s > user 0m0.000s > sys 0m0.031s > > real 0m31.457s > user 0m0.015s > sys 0m0.000s > > real 0m31.591s > user 0m0.000s > sys 0m0.031s > > The another with the JIT version: > > real 0m32.319s > user 0m0.000s > sys 0m0.030s > > But I expect I should get the computer otherwise idle as far as possible > for this. I had other software running, but nothing with heavy loads.
Thanks for testing! Not as good as I had hoped, but also not (much) worse than before...
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
