You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Rollup merge of rust-lang#60656 - petertodd:2019-inline-cursor-over-slice, r=sfackler
Inline some Cursor calls for slices
(Partially) brings back rust-lang#33921
I've noticed in some serialization code I was writing that writes to slices produce much, much, worse code than you'd expect even with optimizations turned on. For example, you'd expect something like this to be zero cost:
```
use std::io::{self, Cursor, Write};
pub fn serialize((a, b): (u64, u64)) -> [u8;8+8] {
let mut r = [0u8;16];
{
let mut w = Cursor::new(&mut r[..]);
w.write(&a.to_le_bytes()).unwrap();
w.write(&b.to_le_bytes()).unwrap();
}
r
}
```
...but it compiles down to [dozens of instructions](https://rust.godbolt.org/z/bdwDzb) because the `slice_write()` calls aren't inlined, which in turn means `unwrap()` can't be optimized away, and so on.
To be clear, this pull-req isn't sufficient by itself: if we want to go down that path we also need to add `#[inline]`'s to the default implementations for functions like `write_all()` in the `Write` trait and so on, or implement them separately in the `Cursor` impls. But I figured I'd start a conversation about what tradeoffs we're expecting here.
0 commit comments