On-demand List allocation in Values<> type #120
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
Turnerj
added
the
enhancement
Collaborator
Author
Owner
|
Happy to take this. Just got some failing tests. |
Turnerj
force-pushed
the
optimising-values-list-use
branch
from
2f95a30 to
706c482
Compare
Collaborator
Author
|
I've rebased this on top of master now that the refactoring of |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Previously we would allocate (up to) 4 lists in the
IEnumerable<object>constructor onValues<>. This is fine when we have all types supported byValues<>present in the JSON we are reading but is overkill when we have less than that.This change is effectively just-in-time list construction where we only instantiate that type when we actually have an item of that type.
According to my benchmarks, there is a 1.5% decrease in allocations - likely as a best case. As a worst case (a
Values4has all 4 types present in JSON), the allocations should be the same.