[Skylark] Speed up string.partition function. #5736
Closed
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
According to JMH and JIT assembly generated for iterators and index accesses, iterator methods like `hasNext` and `next` are not optimized away and result in 3-4X slower execution.
ttsugriy
requested review from
brandjon,
c-parsons,
dkelmer,
dslomov,
laurentlb and
vladmos
as code owners
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
According to JMH using
ImmutableList.oforArrays.asListis ~2X fasterthan using existing approach of creating an empty
ArrayListwith expectedsize and populating it using
addmethod. This is most likely due to extrarange and capacity checks.
Returning
ImmutableListinstead ofArrayListavoids the need to copy itagain in order to create a
SkylarkTuple.These changes speed up the function by ~3X.