A few ideas

[LebedevRI]

Hi.

I'm migrating off of google benchmark, and there are a few things
that are currently seem to be missing from criterion that are generally useful.
The list isn't meant to be exhaustive, but these are the ones i've spotted so far.
Let me know if there is any interest in these, in which case i'd be interested in contributing.

• log2 axis scaling in addition to log10:
  • Log-2 Axis Scale Plotting #64
  • Log-2 Axis Scale Plotting cargo-criterion#1
• Separate Axis scales:
  • [WIP] Separate Axis Scales for all 3 types of Axis #65
• Generic custom user counters, in addition to/as generalization of the current throughtput measure
• Big-O computation, probably needs to be generic enough to support custom complexities
• Ability to embed some custom JSON-serializable data into a JSON output, just one global field (i don't need this, but i know this is useful)
• Automatic ASLR disablement:
  • Automatic ASLR disablement #66
• ???

Thanks,
Roman.

[cxw620]

Maybe the following things are also helpful:

1. Specify axis scaling type by X / Y separately (currently, axis scaling type setting will apply to both X / Y axis, but sometimes we just want to draw plot Y-log(X) or log(Y)-X).
2. Use logarithmic axis scaling automatically (seems to be complex to implement so).

[LebedevRI]

@berkus @lemmih do you want the features i've listed? I'd be more than happy to contribute them.

[berkus]

@LebedevRI hi, i'm currently on vacation (response times may be longer), but the list sounds reasonable, I'm fine with adding this functionality.

Separate scaling for each axis definitely sounds like a good idea @cxw620!

[LebedevRI]

@LebedevRI hi, i'm currently on vacation (response times may be longer), but the list sounds reasonable, I'm fine with adding this functionality.

Separate scaling for each axis definitely sounds like a good idea @cxw620!

This is very relieving to hear. I'll be looking into these...

[berkus]

Thank you so much for contributing these improvements, @LebedevRI!

[berkus]

Hi, what's the progress with #64 - i think it needed some touchups still? If it's good to merge I would go ahead, just say the word.

[LebedevRI]

Hi, what's the progress with #64 - i think it needed some touchups still? If it's good to merge I would go ahead, just say the word.

Hi! Other than interaction with cargo-criterion, i think i don't recall anything problematic in #64.
But then someone more familiar with the codebase is in a better place to codereview the change :)