QtTest vs. QTest

Thomas Baumgart thb at net-bembel.de
Sun Mar 14 12:25:35 GMT 2021


an hour ago I read the article https://www.kdab.com/beware-of-qt-module-wide-includes/[1] and saw that it also applies to the KMyMoney code base. So I made that simple change and compared the compile times on the 5.1 branch of the two versions (ran both twice).

QtTest (testcases only) - the original version
real    0m16,376s
user    2m31,903s
sys     0m11,080s

real    0m16,240s
user    2m34,316s
sys     0m11,436s

QTest (testcases only) - the improved version
real    0m13,602s
user    2m4,875s
sys     0m10,391s

real    0m13,626s
user    2m5,270s
sys     0m10,305s

Removing that lower-case T gains around 30 seconds of compile time (user). Not too bad. The difference to the 'real' time savings of about 3 seconds is due to the fact that I run this with make -j13 here on 6 cores with hyperthreading.



Thomas Baumgart

https://www.signal.org/       Signal, the better WhatsApp
Faster, better, cheaper - choose two of the above.
 - Old engineering proverb

[1] https://www.kdab.com/beware-of-qt-module-wide-includes/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kmymoney-devel/attachments/20210314/767adb19/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 868 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kmymoney-devel/attachments/20210314/767adb19/attachment.sig>

More information about the KMyMoney-devel mailing list