trunk/misc/bench.txt

How did I decide to remove functional interface and instead go with
SFRM_Materialize? Well, I benchmarked both implementations:

Benchmark: timing 1000 iterations of 0_old, 1_new, 2_old, 3_new, 4_old, 5_new...
     0_old: 11 wallclock secs ( 2.83 usr +  0.05 sys =  2.88 CPU) @ 347.22/s (n=1000)
     1_new:  9 wallclock secs ( 1.91 usr +  0.05 sys =  1.96 CPU) @ 510.20/s (n=1000)
     2_old: 10 wallclock secs ( 2.61 usr +  0.05 sys =  2.66 CPU) @ 375.94/s (n=1000)
     3_new: 10 wallclock secs ( 1.93 usr +  0.04 sys =  1.97 CPU) @ 507.61/s (n=1000)
     4_old: 13 wallclock secs ( 2.66 usr +  0.05 sys =  2.71 CPU) @ 369.00/s (n=1000)
     5_new: 12 wallclock secs ( 1.96 usr +  0.03 sys =  1.99 CPU) @ 502.51/s (n=1000)
1	How did I decide to remove functional interface and instead go with
2	SFRM_Materialize? Well, I benchmarked both implementations:
3
4	Benchmark: timing 1000 iterations of 0_old, 1_new, 2_old, 3_new, 4_old, 5_new...
5	0_old: 11 wallclock secs ( 2.83 usr + 0.05 sys = 2.88 CPU) @ 347.22/s (n=1000)
6	1_new: 9 wallclock secs ( 1.91 usr + 0.05 sys = 1.96 CPU) @ 510.20/s (n=1000)
7	2_old: 10 wallclock secs ( 2.61 usr + 0.05 sys = 2.66 CPU) @ 375.94/s (n=1000)
8	3_new: 10 wallclock secs ( 1.93 usr + 0.04 sys = 1.97 CPU) @ 507.61/s (n=1000)
9	4_old: 13 wallclock secs ( 2.66 usr + 0.05 sys = 2.71 CPU) @ 369.00/s (n=1000)
10	5_new: 12 wallclock secs ( 1.96 usr + 0.03 sys = 1.99 CPU) @ 502.51/s (n=1000)