Alexander Zaitsev zamazan4ik

I was specifically talking about ripgrep though. And I found your comment pretty condescending personally, since it implied I wasn't considering user experience.

I didn't want to attack you personally or anything like that. I meant only that "release-lto" is less visible to users by default, and it creates more complexity in discovering this profile. I never meant that you don't care at all about users - of course I understand that by separation of these profiles you care about "Ripgrep installation UX" experience from the "waiting for finished build" way, and I appreciate that! Possibly my words sounded a bit too rude - I sincerely apologize for that. I didn't mean anything like that. And I want to point this straight - I highly appreciate your work in many fields, especially for "ripgrep" as my daily driver. I am trying my best in using right and polite words since English isn't my native language. I do not want to offend anyone and my intention is keeping the conversation exclusively in a polite w

	#![no_std]
	#![no_core]
	#![crate_type = "lib"]
	#![feature(
	no_core,
	intrinsics,
	lang_items,
	auto_traits,
	freeze_impls,
	negative_impls,

	critcmp original_release cu1 thin_lto thin_lto_cu1 fat_lto fat_lto_cu1


	group cu1 fat_lto fat_lto_cu1 original_release thin_lto thin_lto_cu1
	----- --- ------- ----------- ---------------- -------- ------------
	document_parse/jmespath_variable/large 1.08 33.5±0.83ms ? ?/sec 1.01 31.5±1.46ms ? ?/sec 1.00 31.2±1.15ms ? ?/sec 1.08 33.7±0.35ms ? ?/sec 1.04 32.2±0.42ms ? ?/sec 1.00 31.1±1.43ms ? ?/sec
	document_parse/jmespath_variable/medium 1.09 2.6±0.01ms ? ?/sec 1.01

	Running benches/renderer.rs (target/release/deps/renderer-79054d4db37cd1fa)
	parse/flowchart_small time: [22.457 µs 22.476 µs 22.505 µs]
	change: [-11.140% -10.990% -10.786%] (p = 0.00 < 0.05)
	Performance has improved.
	Found 10 outliers among 100 measurements (10.00%)
	6 (6.00%) high mild
	4 (4.00%) high severe
	parse/flowchart_medium time: [142.03 µs 142.10 µs 142.16 µs]
	change: [-7.2526% -7.0706% -6.9360%] (p = 0.00 < 0.05)
	Performance has improved.

	Running benches/renderer.rs (target/release/deps/renderer-b5f230d2c8013d1b)
	parse/flowchart_small time: [25.186 µs 25.212 µs 25.242 µs]
	Found 2 outliers among 100 measurements (2.00%)
	2 (2.00%) high mild
	parse/flowchart_medium time: [152.67 µs 153.21 µs 153.97 µs]
	Found 7 outliers among 100 measurements (7.00%)
	3 (3.00%) high mild
	4 (4.00%) high severe
	parse/flowchart_large time: [728.16 µs 729.19 µs 730.57 µs]
	Found 6 outliers among 100 measurements (6.00%)

	\| Benchmark \| Measurement \|
	\|---------------------------------------\|--------------\|
	\| baseline \| 1.41ns \|
	\| has_not_found \| 1.71ns \|
	\| has \| 1.91ns \|
	\| owns_not_found \| 1.70ns \|
	\| owns \| 1.91ns \|
	\| get_id_not_found \| 1.92ns \|
	\| get \| 2.49ns \|
	\| get_pair \| 5.96ns \|

	>I was specifically talking about ripgrep though. And I found your comment pretty condescending personally, since it implied I wasn't considering user experience.

	I didn't want to attack you personally or anything like that. I meant only that "release-lto" is less visible to users by default, and it creates more complexity in discovering this profile. I never meant that you don't care at all about users - of course I understand that by separation of these profiles you care about "Ripgrep installation UX" experience from the "waiting for finished build" way, and I appreciate that! Possibly my words sounded a bit too rude - I sincerely apologize for that. I didn't mean anything like that. And I want to point this straight - I highly appreciate your work in many fields, especially for "ripgrep" as my daily driver. I am trying my best in using right and polite words since English isn't my native language. I do not want to offend anyone and my intention is keeping the conversation exclusively in a polite w

	\| Benchmark \| Measurement \|
	\|---------------------------------------\|--------------\|
	\| baseline \| 0.76ns \|
	\| has_not_found \| 0.74ns \|
	\| has \| 0.75ns \|
	\| owns_not_found \| 0.64ns \|
	\| owns \| 0.64ns \|
	\| get_id_not_found \| 0.64ns \|
	\| get \| 0.64ns \|
	\| get_pair \| 2.44ns \|

	\| Benchmark \| Measurement \|
	\|---------------------------------------\|--------------\|
	\| baseline \| 0.78ns \|
	\| has_not_found \| 0.85ns \|
	\| has \| 0.86ns \|
	\| owns_not_found \| 0.64ns \|
	\| owns \| 0.65ns \|
	\| get_id_not_found \| 0.65ns \|
	\| get \| 0.65ns \|
	\| get_pair \| 2.78ns \|

	\| Benchmark \| Measurement \|
	\|---------------------------------------\|--------------\|
	\| baseline \| 2.01ns \|
	\| has_not_found \| 1.09ns \|
	\| has \| 1.49ns \|
	\| owns_not_found \| 1.07ns \|
	\| owns \| 1.29ns \|
	\| get_id_not_found \| 1.19ns \|
	\| get \| 1.50ns \|
	\| get_pair \| 4.95ns \|