Nasal performance and benchmarks: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (→References: link to original Nasal regression tests (Andy Ross): https://github.com/andyross/nasal/tree/master/misc) |
m (→Articles: yet another one) |
||
Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
* [[Feature Scaling]] | * [[Feature Scaling]] | ||
* [[Built-in Profiler]] | * [[Built-in Profiler]] | ||
* [[Resource Tracking for FlightGear]] | |||
=== See also === | === See also === |
Revision as of 17:08, 22 January 2019
This article is a stub. You can help the wiki by expanding it. |
The FlightGear forum has a subforum related to: Nasal Scripting |
Nasal scripting |
---|
Nasal internals |
---|
Memory Management (GC) |
This article shall collect best practices for coding in Nasal based on regular performance tests.
Motivation
Over the years many things have been improved so some old findings regarding performance are not true anymore. Regular benchmarking and updating should help the FlightGear community to have a clear picture of which code constructs perform well. Sometimes performance and "good" coding style (e.g. readability, re-usability, maintainability) might be in conflict.
Benchmark add-on
The benchmark add-on will be published here. It is basically a collection of nasal snippets to be tested.
Performance analysis
2019-01
to be written
-->
References
Regression tests
Articles
- Howto:Canvas Path Benchmarking
- FlightGear Benchmark
- Feature Scaling
- Built-in Profiler
- Resource Tracking for FlightGear
See also
Discussions
References
|