[6.0] Reduce overhead of .expectationChecked event handling in #expect().
#657
Conversation
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
…`. (#610) This PR refactors the implementation of `#expect()` and `#require()` a bit such that they don't incur more than minimal overhead posting `.expectationChecked` events if nobody is listening for them (which, currently, nobody is.) We considered removing `.expectationChecked` outright, but XCTest has historically had a number of requests for a way to observe calls to `XCTAssert()` etc. even when they pass, so we opted not to remove the event kind at this time. This PR also introduces a cache for fully-qualified type names so that we don't need to call into the runtime to get them as often. Overall speedup is approximately **90% or 11x**. Test time for a tight loop of 1,000,000 `#expect()` calls goes from 5.898893 seconds down to 0.515558291 seconds (as measured on my work computer.) Resolves rdar://133517028. ### Checklist: - [x] Code and documentation should follow the style of the [Style Guide](https://github.com/apple/swift-testing/blob/main/Documentation/StyleGuide.md). - [x] If public symbols are renamed or modified, DocC references should be updated.
grynspan
added
bug
grynspan
requested review from
stmontgomery,
dennisweissmann,
briancroom,
SeanROlszewski and
suzannaratcliff
as code owners
|
@swift-ci test |
briancroom
approved these changes
Sep 3, 2024
grynspan
deleted the
jgrynspan/jgrynspan/133517028-minimize-expectationChecked-overhead-6.0
branch
ahoppen
added a commit
to ahoppen/swift-testing
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 4, 2024
… in `#expect()`. (swiftlang#657)" This reverts commit 3e30663.
ahoppen
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 4, 2024
Revert "[6.0] Reduce overhead of `.expectationChecked` event handling in `#expect()`. (#657)"
grynspan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 4, 2024
…pect()`. (#657) **Explanation:** Optimizes the implementation of `#expect()`, in particular the parts that ask for fully-qualified type names and generate `.expectationChecked` events. **Scope:** 6.0 branch **Issue:** N/A **Original PR:** #610 **Risk:** Moderate—refactors code inside `#expect()` and introduces a new lock and atomic value used by them. **Testing:** New unit test coverage, existing coverage. **Reviewer:** @briancroom @suzannaratcliff
|
See also #659 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Explanation: Optimizes the implementation of
#expect(), in particular the parts that ask for fully-qualified type names and generate.expectationCheckedevents.Scope: 6.0 branch
Issue: N/A
Original PR: #610
Risk: Moderate—refactors code inside
#expect()and introduces a new lock and atomic value used by them.Testing: New unit test coverage, existing coverage.
Reviewer: @briancroom @suzannaratcliff