> This looks very unrealistic. Do you redirect data sent to stderr to
> an output file?
No, I haven't redirected the data sent to stderr to an output file, for measuring time : (
I thought I have to use the time value which I got when data from stderr is not sent to a .txt file
therefore I have analyzed the time value which I got when data from stderr was not sent to a .txt file.
When I am redirecting stderr logs to a text file using:
`main arial.ttf qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnm 2>sdterr_logs.txt`
I am getting the following results:
`FT_LOGGING`: 8 sec
`FT_DEBUG_LEVEL_TRACE`: 11 sec
> Otherwise I guess the big difference between `FT_LOGGING` and
> `FT_DEBUG_LEVEL_TRACE` is due to file buffering. In other words, data
> sent to `stderr` gets output line by line to the screen, which is
> slow, while data sent to the log file gets buffered completely, and it
> is written to the disk in asynchronously to avoid write delays.
I guess this is only the reason for the difference between the time values of `FT_LOGGING`
and `FT_DEBUG_LEVEL_TRACE`...
> Maybe it makes sense to use C function `setvbuf` to exactly control
> the buffering mode of the output file descriptor.
Ok, I will try this one out, but I guess using the `setvbuf()` in no buffering mode for writing logs
to a file will give the same time value as time value produced when logs are written to stderr line by line...
> Could you test your program under a Unix-like OS (i.e., GNU/Linux,
> MacOS, other BSD variants), too?
Ok, I will let you know once done.
Thanks,
Priyesh