-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 509
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
Further optimize IODeferred
#3435
Further optimize IODeferred
#3435
Conversation
IODeferred
IODeferred
Let's try this again, now that we're actually using this specialization lol. Benchmarks incoming ... |
Huh 🤔 This PR
series/3.x
|
There we go :)
|
IODeferred
IODeferred
Is there a reason this can't be for |
Good question, technically no, but there are some existing conflicts between the branches due to |
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.
Nicely done! :-)
Just getting it into the record, unfortunately benchmarks showed that it made no difference at best, or slower at worst. The idea was to try to cache the
get: IO[A]
value in the atomic reference, instead ofA
, similar to whatIOFiber
does forjoin
.after
before