-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 962
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Per-method parameterization #256
Comments
Closed
This was referenced Sep 2, 2017
adamsitnik
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 21, 2017
I am going to work on some PoC |
adamsitnik
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Nov 7, 2017
adamsitnik
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Nov 7, 2017
Or something that could be constant, but it's a lot, say, |
@adamsitnik, hooray! |
18 tasks
alinasmirnova
pushed a commit
to alinasmirnova/BenchmarkDotNet
that referenced
this issue
Sep 22, 2018
alinasmirnova
pushed a commit
to alinasmirnova/BenchmarkDotNet
that referenced
this issue
Sep 22, 2018
* Per-method parameterization, dotnet#256 * Allow mixing [Params] and [Arguments] in a single Benchmark, dotnet#256 * introduction of ArrayParam, more samples * initialize arguments as fields in ctor to exclude overhead, load them to local vars and just pass in benchmark * implement support of the disassembler entry method for arguments * add error for benchmark with arguments for InProcessToolchain (no support yet), dotnet#687 * the docs about Arguments ;)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
This is related to #60.
I've read the docs on parameterization but this seems a little clunky compared with what I'm used to for unit tests. If I want to benchmark several methods, with different sets of parameters, it's annoying to need a separate class for each method.
For unit tests, I can specify constants via attributes, and sources of parameters by name. It would be nice to have this in unit tests too, e.g.
Or:
Apologies if this is a duplicate...
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: