-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
use try_fold instead of try_for_each to reduce compile time #64885
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thoughts on equality check vs pattern matching here, can it have an effect or none at all?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
made a quick diff in godbolt and there is less code to inline so that is something that I can do
ZN72$LT$example..LoopState$LT$C$C$B$GT$$u20$as$u20$core..cmp..PartialEq$GT$2eq17h37dbcaf2df999e09E is a lot to inline
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would hope it has no effect, since
LoopState<(),()>
is ani1
in LLVM......and it is in
-O
, but very different in debug: https://rust.godbolt.org/z/LKOpZ7Looks like the
PartialEq::eq
that gets generated is pretty bad, and it's still bad removing the generics: https://rust.godbolt.org/z/o6Nuaw Could there be a "this is a field-less enum so just compare the discriminants" path in the derive? It looks, unfortunately, likeas u8 == 1
is the shortest-emitted-IR way to do these checks. And we're avoiding the derives in other places too, likerust/src/libcore/cmp.rs
Lines 632 to 638 in 702b45e
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh interesting. So we could improve here just by implementing PartialEq manually, or even adding a separate method for just discriminant comparison. But then pattern matching works well too. Like, just a method for ".is_continue()"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
but the pattern match avoids having a function to inline completely as long as a function is used the llvm-ir will contain a call and a function