Sigh, I don't know that Bu::String is slower, but it looks like std::string is

faster.  Oh well.

1 files changed, 8 insertions, 8 deletions

diff --git a/src/tests/string.cpp b/src/tests/string.cpp
index 12ce8a8..b37460e 100644
--- a/src/tests/string.cpp
+++ b/src/tests/string.cpp
@@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ void doTimings()
         Bu::String fs1, fs2;
         std::string ss1, ss2;
         double dStart, dEnd, tfs1, tfs2, tfs3, tss1, tss2, tss3;
-        int nChars = 500000, nChunks=5000, nCopies=5000000, nChunkSize=1024*4;
+        int nChars = 50000000, nChunks=50000, nCopies=500000000, nChunkSize=1024*4;
         char *buf = new char[nChunkSize];
         memset( buf, '!', nChunkSize );
 
@@ -106,21 +106,21 @@ void doTimings()
         tss3 = dEnd-dStart;
 
         printf(
-                "Results:       singles:        chunks:         copies:\n"
-                "Bu::String    %10.2f/s   %10.2f/s   %10.2f/s\n"
-                "std::string    %10.2f/s   %10.2f/s   %10.2f/s\n",
+                "Results:          singles:              chunks:            copies:\n"
+                "Bu::String    %15.2f/s   %15.2f/s   %15.2f/s\n"
+                "std::string   %15.2f/s   %15.2f/s   %15.2f/s\n",
                 nChars/tfs1, nChunks/tfs2, nCopies/tfs3,
                 nChars/tss1, nChunks/tss2, nCopies/tss3 );
 
         delete[] buf;
 }
 
-#define pem printf("---------\n%08tX: %s\n%08tX: %s\n", (ptrdiff_t)str.getStr(), str.getStr(), (ptrdiff_t)str2.getStr(), str2.getStr() );
+#define pem printf("---------\n%08tX: %s\n%08tX: %s\n", (ptrdiff_t)str.getConstStr(), str.getConstStr(), (ptrdiff_t)str2.getConstStr(), str2.getConstStr() );
 int main( )
 {
-        Bu::String fs1;
-        for( int j = 0; j < 500000; j++ ) fs1 += (char)('a'+(j%26));
-        return 0;
+//      Bu::String fs1;
+//      for( int j = 0; j < 500000; j++ ) fs1 += (char)('a'+(j%26));
+//      return 0;
 
         Bu::String str("th");