| commit | bfcec24f6d10028f24bf3f4d32a2144912cc771c | [log] [tgz] |
|---|---|---|
| author | Elliott Hughes <enh@google.com> | Mon Sep 21 14:08:38 2009 -0700 |
| committer | Elliott Hughes <enh@google.com> | Mon Sep 21 14:08:38 2009 -0700 |
| tree | ec5524e5221e90c54cb4600b68f51cd381c97b6f | |
| parent | a6a018e3be5dffc2c98fb9df0167cfd0acd55180 [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