Conversation
joemfb
approved these changes
Jan 3, 2024
Collaborator
joemfb
left a comment
joemfb
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This looks great. I think we'll want to special-case bloq 3 (and maybe 0). And +rev should get a similar rewrite.
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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 running
(swp 3)on a 70MB atom would always exhaust a 2gb loom. With this we can easily(swp 3)and even(swp 0)a 500MB atom. Note that fares a lot better even with no special casing of blocksizes 0, 3 and 5.