Skip to content
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

Make the inherent impl overlap check linear-time #69009

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Make the inherent impl overlap check linear-time #69009

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

jonas-schievink
Copy link
Contributor

Despite #68911, this code was still showing up in profiles, so I turned it from a O(n²) comparison between all inherent impls to an O(n) algorithm that builds an intermediate hash map to find items with the same names. It also makes the code a bit clearer.

The actual performance gains I've measured are pretty small (1-3%), and it's not impossible that the hash map has a negative perf impact in some situations, so I'll query perf for this.

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

r? @cramertj

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Feb 9, 2020
@jonas-schievink
Copy link
Contributor Author

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Awaiting bors try build completion

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Feb 9, 2020

⌛ Trying commit 11c7e82 with merge 696990e8079f8a668b38304d45e9528acaa5aca4...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Feb 10, 2020

☀️ Try build successful - checks-azure
Build commit: 696990e8079f8a668b38304d45e9528acaa5aca4 (696990e8079f8a668b38304d45e9528acaa5aca4)

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Queued 696990e8079f8a668b38304d45e9528acaa5aca4 with parent 71c7e14, future comparison URL.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking try commit 696990e8079f8a668b38304d45e9528acaa5aca4, comparison URL.

@jonas-schievink
Copy link
Contributor Author

Looks like this causes a slight regression in packed-simd, even. If anyone has an idea for improving this, please let me know. If not I guess I'll close this and focus on other optimizations.

@JohnCSimon JohnCSimon added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Feb 16, 2020
@JohnCSimon
Copy link
Member

Ping from triage: @jonas-schievink - can you please post your status or close this PR?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants