BenchMarkReport_0.md

Reflection Template Library (RTL) — Benchmark Report

This document presents benchmark results for the Reflection Template Library (RTL).
The goal was to measure the runtime overhead of reflective function calls compared to direct calls and std::function, under increasing workloads.

---

Benchmark Setup

We tested:

• Direct calls (baseline).
• std::function calls and method calls.
• RTL reflective calls (free functions and member methods, with and without return values).

Each benchmark was repeated across workloads of increasing complexity, with times measured in nanoseconds.

---

Results Summary

Workload	Direct Call (ns)	Reflected Call Overhead (ns)	Reflected Method Overhead (ns)	Notes (With Return)
baseline_40ns	39.0 / 44.7	+2.5	+6.6	+10.6 / +14.3
workload_80ns	82.4 / 82.5	~0	~0	+12.5 / +15.6
workload_100ns	94.2 / 100.0	+1.4	+8.8	+12.0 / +16.0
workload_150ns*	139.0 / 158.0	+2–3	+14–17	+12–13 / +17–19

*Three independent runs were recorded at ~150 ns workload; numbers are consistent.

---

Insights

• Constant Overhead
  Reflection overhead remains almost constant across workloads:

  • No-return functions: +2–6 ns.
  • Return-value functions: +10–20 ns.

• Percentage Overhead Shrinks

  • At the 40 ns baseline, overhead was ~25%.
  • By ~150 ns workloads, overhead dropped below 10%.

• No Scaling Penalty
  The overhead does not grow with function complexity.
  This indicates that RTL adds only a fixed, predictable cost per call, with no hidden allocations.

• Performance-Culture Friendly
  This aligns with C++’s ethos: you only pay a small, predictable cost when you use reflection.

---

Conclusion

The Reflection Template Library (RTL) demonstrates:

• Runtime reflection with constant, minimal overhead.
• Predictable cost model: ~10–20 ns for reflective calls with returns.