3 ms·
the warm-up phase is the whole reason why esbuild and swc exists btw. and also the sample is basically a small hello world. any real project would do a little m
by merb 4y ago
the warm-up phase is the whole reason why esbuild and swc exists btw. and also the sample is basically a small hello world. any real project would do a little more and the jit would not optimize as much.
also 2x 300k is not really the way how multi-threading/concurrency/parallelism works... especially not golang, which should not be run with GOMAXPROCS=1....
- cxr 4y agoAs far as I can follow your argument, it seems to be that the native tools perform better on the small inputs (that only ever take a second or three to complete), and that the creators ("maintainers"?) of Sucrase have their thumb on the scale or something, since they emphasize in their results the very large inputs that will involve longer running jobs where their tool has had a chance to warm up. In other words, the tools you're defending only do better when it doesn't really matter, and the tool you're downplaying outperforms the competition on the jobs where it actually does matter. If anything is backwards (or "stupid", as you put it) then that seems to be it. Maybe I'm misunderstanding. In that case, please provide a better benchmark.