On Sun, Jul 16, 2023 at 01:01:23PM -0700, Gary Johnson wrote: > All of those things are possible and probably good ideas, but > driving them all to zero would improve the time by only 656 ms and > still leaves you with an annoying 2.1 s unaccounted for. > > The output of hyperfine shows only the program name. What command > are you executing? If the command was something like this, > > vim -cq > > then I can't explain what vim could be doing from the time it > printed "--- VIM STARTED ---" in the log until it exited. > > It would be interesting to see what hyperfine measures with the > command > > vim -N -u NONE -i NONE -X -cq > I was using `hyperfine -i /usr/bin/vim`.
But I tested with above commands too. ``` $ hyperfine "vim -cq" Benchmark 1: vim -cq Time (mean ± σ): 2.414 s ± 0.017 s [User: 0.358 s, System: 0.048 s] Range (min … max): 2.392 s … 2.447 s 10 runs $ hyperfine "vim -N -u NONE -i NONE -X -cq" Benchmark 1: vim -N -u NONE -i NONE -X -cq Time (mean ± σ): 2.047 s ± 0.006 s [User: 0.032 s, System: 0.010 s] Range (min … max): 2.039 s … 2.056 s 10 runs ``` -- Manas -- -- You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_use" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/mjrzfpp4mq7a7dvpoltvt4wx7pt7fv6c4tpaj7v7hvpl6uttzi%40nwkpwatcrp7q.
