vec: Write the .extend() specialization in cleaner style #37709
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
As far as possible, use regular `default fn` specialization in favour of ad-hoc conditionals.
|
r? @sfackler (rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
|
@bors: r+ Thanks! |
|
📌 Commit 5058e58 has been approved by |
eddyb
added a commit
to eddyb/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 11, 2016
…chton vec: Write the .extend() specialization in cleaner style As far as possible, use regular `default fn` specialization in favour of ad-hoc conditionals. No intentional functional change. Code quality was validated against the same benchmarks that were used in initial trusted len development. This change is prompted by taking impressions from rust-lang#27749 (comment)
eddyb
added a commit
to eddyb/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 12, 2016
…chton vec: Write the .extend() specialization in cleaner style As far as possible, use regular `default fn` specialization in favour of ad-hoc conditionals. No intentional functional change. Code quality was validated against the same benchmarks that were used in initial trusted len development. This change is prompted by taking impressions from rust-lang#27749 (comment)
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 12, 2016
Rollup of 30 pull requests - Successful merges: #37190, #37368, #37481, #37503, #37527, #37535, #37551, #37584, #37600, #37613, #37615, #37659, #37662, #37669, #37682, #37688, #37690, #37692, #37693, #37694, #37695, #37696, #37698, #37699, #37705, #37708, #37709, #37716, #37724, #37727 - Failed merges: #37640, #37689, #37717
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 14, 2016
Restore Vec::from_iter() specialization Since I said "no intentional functional change" in the previous commit, I guess it was inevitable there were unintentional changes. Not functional, but optimization-wise. This restores the extend specialization's use in Vec::from_iter. (commit 1). Also use specialization in from_iter to reduce allocation code duplication for the TrustedLen case (commit 2). Bug introduced in PR #37709
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.
As far as possible, use regular
default fnspecialization in favour ofad-hoc conditionals.
No intentional functional change. Code quality was validated against the same
benchmarks that were used in initial trusted len development.
This change is prompted by taking impressions from
#27749 (comment)