Skip to content
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

Remove powi, "square can be computed more efficiently" #7201

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 18, 2021
Merged

Remove powi, "square can be computed more efficiently" #7201

merged 1 commit into from
May 18, 2021

Conversation

mucinoab
Copy link
Contributor

@mucinoab mucinoab commented May 9, 2021

powi(2) produces exactly the same native code as x * x
powi was part of the [suboptimal_flops] lint

fixes #7058
changelog: Remove powi [suboptimal_flops], "square can be computed more efficiently"

@rust-highfive
Copy link

Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @giraffate (or someone else) soon.

If any changes to this PR are deemed necessary, please add them as extra commits. This ensures that the reviewer can see what has changed since they last reviewed the code. Due to the way GitHub handles out-of-date commits, this should also make it reasonably obvious what issues have or haven't been addressed. Large or tricky changes may require several passes of review and changes.

Please see the contribution instructions for more information.

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties label May 9, 2021
Comment on lines 322 to 335
span_lint_and_sugg(
cx,
SUBOPTIMAL_FLOPS,
parent.span,
"square can be computed more efficiently",
"consider using",
format!(
"{}.mul_add({}, {})",
Sugg::hir(cx, &args[0], ".."),
Sugg::hir(cx, &args[0], ".."),
Sugg::hir(cx, other_addend, ".."),
),
Applicability::MachineApplicable,
);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why does this case also removed?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It is just a special case for

fn check_mul_add(cx: &LateContext<'_>, expr: &Expr<'_>) {

Should we keep it?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In the related issue, I found that the case of x * x was discussed, but I couldn't find the discussion of mul_add. So I don't know why this case needs to be removed as same.

If there is no reason, I think it would be better to keep it.

@giraffate giraffate added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action from the author. (Use `@rustbot ready` to update this status) and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties labels May 13, 2021
@mucinoab mucinoab marked this pull request as draft May 15, 2021 18:09
@mucinoab
Copy link
Contributor Author

@giraffate I did some changes. Should we keep the same names for everything?

Copy link
Contributor

@giraffate giraffate left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@mucinoab It looks good! Can you squash the commits and mark this PR as ready?

powi(2) produces exactly the same native code as x * x
@mucinoab mucinoab marked this pull request as ready for review May 18, 2021 03:08
@mucinoab
Copy link
Contributor Author

@giraffate All done.

@giraffate
Copy link
Contributor

@bors r+

Thanks!

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented May 18, 2021

📌 Commit be540e6 has been approved by giraffate

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented May 18, 2021

⌛ Testing commit be540e6 with merge 9028173...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented May 18, 2021

☀️ Test successful - checks-action_dev_test, checks-action_remark_test, checks-action_test
Approved by: giraffate
Pushing 9028173 to master...

@bors bors merged commit 9028173 into rust-lang:master May 18, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action from the author. (Use `@rustbot ready` to update this status)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

"square can be computed more efficiently" is wrong
4 participants