Use for...in instead of Object.keys for parallelRouteKey traversal#89905
Merged
timneutkens merged 1 commit intocanaryfrom Feb 17, 2026
Conversation
nextjs-bot
added
created-by: Turbopack team
Member
Author
This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking. |
Collaborator
Tests Passed |
Collaborator
Stats from current PR✅ No significant changes detected📊 All Metrics📖 Metrics GlossaryDev Server Metrics:
Build Metrics:
Change Thresholds:
⚡ Dev Server
📦 Dev Server (Webpack) (Legacy)📦 Dev Server (Webpack)
⚡ Production Builds
📦 Production Builds (Webpack) (Legacy)📦 Production Builds (Webpack)
📦 Bundle SizesBundle Sizes⚡ TurbopackClient Main Bundles: **437 kB** → **437 kB** ✅ -3 B81 files with content-based hashes (individual files not comparable between builds) Server Middleware
Build DetailsBuild Manifests
📦 WebpackClient Main Bundles
Polyfills
Pages
Server Edge SSR
Middleware
Build DetailsBuild Manifests
Build Cache
🔄 Shared (bundler-independent)Runtimes
📝 Changed Files (8 files)Files with changes:
View diffsapp-page-exp..ntime.dev.jsDiff too large to display app-page-exp..time.prod.jsDiff too large to display app-page-tur..ntime.dev.jsDiff too large to display app-page-tur..time.prod.jsDiff too large to display app-page-tur..ntime.dev.jsDiff too large to display app-page-tur..time.prod.jsDiff too large to display app-page.runtime.dev.jsDiff too large to display app-page.runtime.prod.jsDiff too large to display |
gaojude
approved these changes
Feb 17, 2026
timneutkens
deleted the
02-12-use_for.in_instead_of_object.keys_for_parallelroutekey_traversal
branch
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
3 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.
For Maintainers
What?
Replace
Object.keys().forEachwith afor...inloop in thecreateFlightRouterStateFromLoaderTreeImplfunction.Why?
for...inavoids the intermediate array allocation fromObject.keys(), which becomes increasingly impactful as key count grows.for...infor (i) + Object.keys()for...of Object.keys()Object.keys().forEach()While the impact is minimal this code is in the hot path for rendering every request so it's worth optimizing. Especially as the payload will have a lot of single-key cases.
How?
Changed the
Object.keys(parallelRoutes).forEach()pattern to a directfor (const parallelRouteKey in parallelRoutes)loop while maintaining the same functionality.