Hi Jason, Thank you for the PR. I've just merged it.
For now I have added this to the blog post: Results below and the comments about Schema being slow is no longer true. See this pull request <https://github.com/muhuk/validation-benchmark/pull/6> for the results Jason got with quick mode benchmark. I am thinking about generating a stand alone page (GH pages) so that I don't have to update or create a new post everytime the results are updated. The README for Schema doesn't mention checker function, FYI. On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 7:30 AM, Jason Wolfe <ja...@w01fe.com> wrote: > Thanks for putting this together! > > For schema, I think using `s/validate` is not a fair comparison with the > other libraries -- as you mention, it throws an exception on error, and it > also has to parse the schema each time. > > I think `s/checker` is the correct construct to use here -- it returns an > error or nil for success (no exceptions), and only parses the schema once. > (This is what's used by `s/defn`, for example). > > Here's a pull request that implements this change: > > https://github.com/muhuk/validation-benchmark/pull/6 > > I posted the updated results in the PR comments as well, which are > qualitatively quite different from the ones currently reported in your blog > post (with this change, schema is fastest on all but one benchmark, often > by a factor of 3 or more). > > Please let me know if you have any questions. > > Thanks, > Jason > > > On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 at 2:47:33 AM UTC+7, Atamert Ölçgen wrote: >> >> Hi All, >> >> I have been working a benchmark for (runtime) validation libraries. I >> think it is mature enough to share the results with the group. >> >> The repo is here: https://github.com/muhuk/validation-benchmark >> >> Raw benchmark output as EDN is here: >> https://gist.github.com/muhuk/93d7d9e46bf5191310aaa4557379d10e >> >> More human readable results are in my blog: >> http://blog.muhuk.com/2016/04/18/performance_comparison_of_annotate_herbert_schema.html >> >> If you are familiar with Annotate, Herbert or Schema, please take a quick >> look at their implementations: >> https://github.com/muhuk/validation-benchmark/tree/master/src/validation_benchmark/lib >> >> Also contributions of other validation libraries are most welcome! >> >> ----- >> >> As an aside: what is the group policy for attachments? Would it be ok if >> I attached images of benchmark results? >> >> -- >> Kind Regards, >> Atamert Ölçgen >> >> ◻◼◻ >> ◻◻◼ >> ◼◼◼ >> >> www.muhuk.com >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Clojure" group. > To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com > Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with > your first post. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Clojure" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- Kind Regards, Atamert Ölçgen ◻◼◻ ◻◻◼ ◼◼◼ www.muhuk.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
