[rurban]

If course I have the benchmarks, because that's how everybody benchmarks it. But rather with the old perl scripts, not with your new python scripts. They suck. Before it was trivial to bench, but not trivial to setup all the environments.

The problem is not that someone else can do it, the problem is YOU need to do it. You got the name reserved for it, you got the machines to do it, you decide to rewrite it and throw them out, no one is looking somewhere else for better and more benchmarks.

The big competitors with better and faster engines have no incentive to match performance when their name is not on the list, and they just publish their own results. Users don't look somewhere else.

[igouy]

>> Before it was trivial to bench, but not trivial to setup all the environments. <<

That's what it's like now -- trivial but time consuming.

There were pain-points with the old perl scripts (and nested make files) but I would have continued to put-up with the problems and would have continued to use the old perl scripts.

But (back in 2008) I couldn't see how to set-affinity with Perl and I could see how to do that with Python.

That's why I rewrote the measurement scripts in Python.

>> They suck. <<

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/QA/Bug_writ...

>> You got the name reserved for it <<

Wow! Think-up a name!

>> you got the machines to do it <<

I have one too-old machine.

>> no one is looking somewhere else for better and more benchmarks <<

55% of page views are from "organic search".

[SwellJoe]

Dude. What's up with attacking someone who does things voluntarily (I presume) for not doing them the way you want them to? That's pretty damned presumptuous.

Open Source stuff really only ever has one guarantee: If it breaks, you get to keep the pieces.

You can put it back together any way you want, but you can't demand they give you a new one that meets your expectations. Unless you want to pay them to do so, and they're willing to accept the money and terms.