sharkdp
Joined 11 years ago
Karma
992
Submissions
197
Member since
Feb 1
http://david-peter.de
View on Hacker NewsRecent submissions
Comment · 10 months ago
Thank you!
I reported this as https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/1994
Support for auto-completing TypedDict keys is tracked here: https://github.com/astral-sh/ty/issues/86
Comment · 10 months ago
We should generally support TypeDicts. Can you go into more details of what is not working for you?
Comment · 1 year ago
> Is it possible that your program was waiting for input that never came?
We do close stdin to prevent this. So you can benchmark `cat`, for example, and it works just fine.
Comment · 1 year ago
> On the flip side (making things more random as opposed to less), something that randomizes the initial stack pointer would be nice, as I've sometimes seen this go really, really wrong (renaming a binary from foo to foo_new made it run >1% slower!).
This is something we do already. We set a `HYPERFINE_RANDOMIZED_ENVIRONMENT_OFFSET` environment variable with a random-length value: https://github.com/sharkdp/hyperfine/blob/87d77c861f1b6c761a...
Comment · 1 year ago
> “Best publicly available” != “great”
Of course. But it is free and open source. And everyone is invited to make it better.
Comment · 1 year ago
> Robust statistics with p-values (not just min/max, compensation for multiple hypotheses, no Gaussian assumptions)
This is not included in the core of hyperfine, but we do have scripts to compute "advanced" statistics, and to perform t-tests here: https://github.com/sharkdp/hyperfine/tree/master/scripts
Please feel free to comment here if you think it should be included in hyperfine itself: https://github.com/sharkdp/hyperfine/issues/523
> Automatic isolation to the greatest extent possible (given appropriate permissions)
This sounds interesting. Please feel free to open a ticket if you have any ideas.
> Interleaved execution, in case something external changes mid-way.
Please see the discussion here: https://github.com/sharkdp/hyperfine/issues/21
> It just… runs things N times and then does a naïve average/min/max?
While there is nothing wrong with computing average/min/max, this is not all hyperfine does. We also compute modified Z-scores to detect outliers. We use that to issue warnings, if we think the mean value is influenced by them. We also warn if the first run of a command took significantly longer than the rest of the runs and suggest counter-measures.
Depending on the benchmark I do, I tend to look at either the `min` or the `mean`. If I need something more fine-grained, I export the results and use the scripts referenced above.
> At that rate, one could just as well use a shell script and eyeball the results.
Statistical analysis (which you can consider to be basic) is just one reason why I wrote hyperfine. The other reason is that I wanted to make benchmarking easy to use. I use warmup runs, preparation commands and parametrized benchmarks all the time. I also frequently use the Markdown export or the JSON export to generate graphs or histograms. This is my personal experience. If you are not interested in all of these features, you can obviously "just as well use a shell script".
Comment · 1 year ago
If that's the case, I would consider it a bug. Please feel free to report it. In general, hyperfine should not take longer than ~3 seconds, unless the command itself takes > 300 ms second to run. In the latter case, we do a minimum of 10 runs by default. So if your program takes 3 min for a single iteration, it would take 30 min by default — yes. But this can be controlled using the `-m`/`--min-runs` option. You can also specify the exact amount of runs using `-r`/`--runs`, if you prefer that.
> I could not find a good way to get Hyperfine to do what I wanted
This is all documented here: https://github.com/sharkdp/hyperfine/tree/master?tab=readme-... under "Basic benchmarks". The options to control the amount of runs are also listed in `hyperfine --help` and in the man page. Please let us know if you think we can improve the documentation / discovery of those options.
Comment · 1 year ago
I don't think it's useless. You can use hyperfine to run multiple benchmarks at the same time, to get a comparison between multiple tools. So if you want it to work without quotes, you need to (1) come up with a way to separate commands and (2) come up with a way to distinguish hyperfine arguments from command arguments. It's doable, but it's also not a great UX if you have to write something like
hyperfine -N -- ls "$dir" \; my_ls "$dir"Comment · 1 year ago
> The issue is it runs a kajillion tests to try and be “statistical”.
If you see any reason for putting “statistical” in quotes, please let us know. hyperfine does not run a lot of tests, but it does try to find outliers in your measurements. This is really valuable in some cases. For example: we can detect when the first run of your program takes much longer than the rest of the runs. We can then show you a warning to let you know that you probably want to either use some warmup runs, or a "--prepare" command to clean (OS) caches if you want a cold-cache benchmark.
> But there’s no good way to say “just run it for 5 seconds and give me the best answer you can”.
What is the "best answer you can"?
> It’s very much designed for nanosecond to low microsecond benchmarks.
Absolutely not. With hyperfine, you can not measure execution times in the "low microsecond" range, let alone nanosecond range. See also my other comment.
Comment · 1 year ago
That doesn't make a lot of sense. It's more like the opposite of what you are saying. The precision of hyperfine is typically in the single-digit millisecond range. Maybe just below 1 ms if you take special care to run the benchmark on a quiet system. Everything below that (microsecond or nanosecond range) is something that you need to address with other forms of benchmarking.
But for everything in the right range (milliseconds, seconds, minutes or above), hyperfine is well suited.
Comment · 1 year ago
Yes. If you don't make use of shell builtins/syntax, you can use hyperfine's `--shell=none`/`-N` option to disable the intermediate shell.
Comment · 1 year ago
Caching is something that you almost always have to be aware of when benchmarking command line applications, even if the application itself has no caching behavior. Please see https://github.com/sharkdp/hyperfine?tab=readme-ov-file#warm... on how to run either warm-cache benchmarks or cold-cache benchmarks.
Comment · 3 years ago
> 365·243 ought to be 365·2425 exactly:
Yes. This is also how it is defined: https://github.com/sharkdp/numbat/blob/ba9e97b1fbf6353d24695...
The calculation above is showing a rounded result (6 significant digits by default).
Comment · 3 years ago
Yes. If you want to know more, you can read about it here: https://github.com/sharkdp/numbat/blob/master/assets/reasons...
Comment · 3 years ago
So 'year' refers to the Gregorian year and is equal to 365.243 days [1]. We also have 'julian_year' which is equal to '365.25 days'.
We also have 'sidereal_day' equal to '23.9345 hours', and if you believe it is useful, we can also add 'sidereal_years'.