glmaths 0.0.1 → 0.0.2
This diff represents the content of publicly available package versions that have been released to one of the supported registries. The information contained in this diff is provided for informational purposes only and reflects changes between package versions as they appear in their respective public registries.
- package/README.md +2 -2
- package/dist/cjs/glmaths.js.map +1 -1
- package/dist/cjs/glmaths.min.js.map +1 -1
- package/dist/esm/glmaths.js.map +1 -1
- package/dist/esm/glmaths.min.js.map +1 -1
- package/dist/glmaths.js.map +1 -1
- package/dist/glmaths.min.js.map +1 -1
- package/package.json +2 -2
- package/src/internalUtils.ts +2 -2
- package/src/mat2.ts +10 -10
- package/src/mat2x3.ts +9 -9
- package/src/mat3.ts +12 -12
- package/src/mat4.ts +26 -26
- package/src/quat.ts +22 -22
- package/src/quat2.ts +8 -8
- package/src/vec2.ts +29 -29
- package/src/vec3.ts +30 -30
- package/src/vec4.ts +28 -28
package/README.md
CHANGED
|
@@ -895,9 +895,9 @@ const b = a.plus(5)
|
|
|
895
895
|
|
|
896
896
|
You can run benchmark with `npm run bench`.
|
|
897
897
|
|
|
898
|
-
Suprisingly, in most operations `
|
|
898
|
+
Suprisingly, in most operations `glmaths` comes faster than its simpler `gl-matrix` library? I honestly quite skeptical about it.
|
|
899
899
|
|
|
900
|
-
This benchmark, though, doesn't tell the difference in loading up a library. When I started running benchmarks, I noticed how on first test `
|
|
900
|
+
This benchmark, though, doesn't tell the difference in loading up a library. When I started running benchmarks, I noticed how on first test `glmaths` was consistently slower, than `gl-matrix`; and I believe this is a setup cost for extending `Float32Array` with all methods and getters for swizzles. There is a hack in `bencmark.js` to overcome this.
|
|
901
901
|
|
|
902
902
|
## Benchmark Results
|
|
903
903
|
|