| commit | 0ee370b97b9ee7f2f321d9d04bd0976362b6f6f0 | [log] [tgz] |
|---|---|---|
| author | Elliott Hughes <enh@google.com> | Mon Sep 21 14:08:38 2009 -0700 |
| committer | Dan Egnor <egnor@google.com> | Tue Nov 17 14:42:24 2009 -0800 |
| tree | a9694d4a667e75ba8cd11b95b9a8f2316cc20cbf | |
| parent | 838598912874c49de45aba3baac644d177920115 [diff] |
Consistently use Formatter's cached NumberFormat.
%f is a lot more expensive than it should be because we're not using the cached
NumberFormat (as we are for %d). Running the microbenchmark I added to the
bug (times in ms, on a Cortex A8):
old new
new Formatter %f 1732 811
String.format %d 635 651
String.format %f 1752 900
reuse Formatter %f 1521 188
Double.toString + 149 148
Double.toString append 33 33
StringBuilder.append 143 139
Bug: 1476