4 ms·
The results are either uninteresting and unreliable, or uninteresting and reliable. Shortcircuit logic keeps me from worrying about reliability. Your shortlogi
by jeroen 18y ago
The results are either uninteresting and unreliable, or uninteresting and reliable. Shortcircuit logic keeps me from worrying about reliability.
Your shortlogic is going the wrong way. The results are either unreliable, or reliable. That is what Resig was trying to find out.
And that the Windows GetTickCount/GetTime functions have a bad precision is common knowledge.
Yet the SunSpider benchmark is often used to measure browser performance. If, as Resig says, the error rate for any test run in [Internet Explorer 8, Opera, Safari, and WebKit Nightly] would be huge then SunSpider benchmarks don't have a lot of value.
- jd 18y agoThe wrong way? My point was that you don't need to test if the results are going to be uninteresting. Benchmarking javascript is useless because it's gui level code. Even if it takes 100ms to run you don't care. Measure browser performance.... why? Why do you care how fast your browser is? Your web apps have to run in any browser, so -if- you care you just have to test if it runs fast enough in the slowest browser. So yes, I'm claiming that SunSpider is trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist (except for javascript compiler writers). Let me quote from the site: "[Sunspider is for measuring speed of] parsing JSON input, a 3D raytracer, cryptography tests, code decompression" Great. Fast javascript client-side cryptography. Just what I need.
- OpenMIKE 18y ago>Why do you care how fast your browser is? JavaScript runs outside of the browser as well (I'm using it for my current project). So, yeah, I care about the accuracy of the performance tests.