Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | |
---|---|---|---|
2010-12-28 | The rough lcs calculation can't be compared against MSFlcs_upper_bound | Eric Anderson | |
PEDANTIC testing showed an error with the current n * 4 + 6. pedantic_n = 7 and n = 6 during the PEDANTIC_TEST. I just reverting to old behavior until we can convert the value to something that can be compared to MSF. | |||
2010-12-27 | Add timing support to lcs_upper_bound | Eric Anderson | |
2010-12-27 | Remove accidental left-over from copy-paste | Eric Anderson | |
2010-12-27 | Reorganize structure and defines so that things are more understandable | Eric Anderson | |
Most things are always "compiled" now, but testing did show that gcc's dead code elimination successfully removes them from the executable. Testing did not show any performance impact. | |||
2010-12-27 | Ignore logs folder | Eric Anderson | |
2010-12-27 | Display benchmark numbers in submit_to_web_batch | Tim Hatch | |
2010-12-27 | Support byte swapping on os-x | Tim Hatch | |
2010-12-27 | lcs_upper_bound's second sum is required all the time and try to handle endians | Eric Anderson | |
2010-12-26 | Only do second sum if it can make a difference | Eric Anderson | |
2010-12-26 | Auto-choose at runtime to do second sum in lcs_upper_bound | Eric Anderson | |
This has no impact for non-DO_SECOND_SUM, but puts DO_SECOND_SUM less than a percent behind. | |||
2010-12-26 | Simple movement of return calculation in lcs_upper_bound | Eric Anderson | |
This increased performance of the non-DO_SECOND_SUM code a _lot_ for something so small. | |||
2010-12-26 | Only add one to lcs_upper_bound or don't do the second sum. | Eric Anderson | |
The DO_SECOND_SUM define has reduced false positives, but without it has a reasonable amount less work. Thus, you must empirically test to find which has the best boost. Right now, DO_SECOND_SUM is faster. | |||
2010-12-26 | Add lcs_upper_bound check before lcs_32_rough for added speed | Eric Anderson | |