⚡️ Speed up function _collect_protected_ranges_for_rename by 38% in PR #1693 (fix/java/object-cast-type)#1695
Open
codeflash-ai[bot] wants to merge 1 commit intofix/java/object-cast-typefrom
Conversation
The optimized code achieves a **38% runtime improvement** (from 4.44ms to 3.22ms) by eliminating recursion overhead and optimizing type lookups through two key changes: ## Primary Optimization: Iterative Stack-Based Traversal The original code used recursive calls (`_collect_protected_ranges_for_rename(child, out)`) which incurred Python function call overhead on every node visit. The line profiler shows this recursion line consumed **44.2% of total time** (11.26ms out of 25.45ms). The optimized version replaces recursion with an explicit stack-based iteration. This eliminates: - Function call/return overhead for each of the 13,393 recursive calls - Stack frame allocation and deallocation - Parameter passing overhead The performance gains are particularly dramatic for deep/wide trees: - **Deep nesting (100 levels)**: 89.4% faster (67.7μs → 35.7μs) - **Wide tree (100×100 nodes)**: 53.6% faster (3.03ms → 1.97ms) - **1000 sequential nodes**: 19.5% faster (527μs → 441μs) ## Secondary Optimization: Module-Level Frozenset Moving protected node types from inline tuple comparisons to a module-level `_PROTECTED_RENAME_TYPES` frozenset provides O(1) hash-based lookups instead of O(n) linear tuple scans. While the performance difference for 5 items is modest, it eliminates repeated tuple construction and improves cache locality. ## Trade-offs The optimization shows slight regressions (5-38% slower) on small, shallow trees due to the overhead of stack setup and iteration machinery. However, these cases are fast enough (typically <3μs) that the absolute time difference is negligible. The optimization excels where it matters most: **real-world AST traversal scenarios with hundreds to thousands of nodes**, where the 38% overall speedup translates to meaningful performance gains during Java code instrumentation workflows. The iterative approach also has better memory characteristics for deep trees, avoiding potential stack overflow issues with Python's recursion limit.
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
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.
⚡️ This pull request contains optimizations for PR #1693
If you approve this dependent PR, these changes will be merged into the original PR branch
fix/java/object-cast-type.📄 38% (0.38x) speedup for
_collect_protected_ranges_for_renameincodeflash/languages/java/instrumentation.py⏱️ Runtime :
4.44 milliseconds→3.22 milliseconds(best of5runs)📝 Explanation and details
The optimized code achieves a 38% runtime improvement (from 4.44ms to 3.22ms) by eliminating recursion overhead and optimizing type lookups through two key changes:
Primary Optimization: Iterative Stack-Based Traversal
The original code used recursive calls (
_collect_protected_ranges_for_rename(child, out)) which incurred Python function call overhead on every node visit. The line profiler shows this recursion line consumed 44.2% of total time (11.26ms out of 25.45ms).The optimized version replaces recursion with an explicit stack-based iteration. This eliminates:
The performance gains are particularly dramatic for deep/wide trees:
Secondary Optimization: Module-Level Frozenset
Moving protected node types from inline tuple comparisons to a module-level
_PROTECTED_RENAME_TYPESfrozenset provides O(1) hash-based lookups instead of O(n) linear tuple scans. While the performance difference for 5 items is modest, it eliminates repeated tuple construction and improves cache locality.Trade-offs
The optimization shows slight regressions (5-38% slower) on small, shallow trees due to the overhead of stack setup and iteration machinery. However, these cases are fast enough (typically <3μs) that the absolute time difference is negligible. The optimization excels where it matters most: real-world AST traversal scenarios with hundreds to thousands of nodes, where the 38% overall speedup translates to meaningful performance gains during Java code instrumentation workflows.
The iterative approach also has better memory characteristics for deep trees, avoiding potential stack overflow issues with Python's recursion limit.
✅ Correctness verification report:
🌀 Click to see Generated Regression Tests
To edit these changes
git checkout codeflash/optimize-pr1693-2026-02-28T01.17.48and push.