-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 606
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
Optimize any/all/noneSatisfy on UnifiedMapWithHashingStrategy - closes #1342 #1406
Conversation
20839e6
to
c2d6a38
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you for the contribution @Desislav-Petrov. I think it would be better to duplicate the functionality in the shortCircuit/shortCircuitWith methods than to externalize the functionality to MapIterate. MapIterate is intended to iterate over Maps, and this iterates over an array, requiring MapIterate to understand how the internals of UnifiedMap and UnifiedMapWithHashingStrategy are implemented.
488ef2a
to
f0ed2bb
Compare
Thanks for the review @donraab - fair points, made the changes & rebased |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
To review this, I checked it out locally and diff'd UnifiedMap with UnifiedMapWithHashingStrategy. I found that the new methods were added in a different location, so diff'ing didn't work. I made the fix so that I could continue the review, but you'll have to apply it as well.
Once I did this I could see that the new implementation and the old are identical, and are good to go. Please move the methods to the same positions and then we ought to merge this.
30d05f0
to
a48d269
Compare
Thx for the feedback @motlin - changes made |
@Desislav-Petrov could you also rebase onto upstream/master and then I'll merge? |
a48d269
to
948d416
Compare
Done @motlin |
PR - would appreciate a review @donraab
Looks like existing tests already cover this refactoring