core::iter: Refactor iterators #16225
Closed
+55
−62
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
| @@ -720,21 +715,10 @@ pub trait ExactSize<A> : DoubleEndedIterator<A> { | |||
| /// If no element matches, None is returned. | |||
| #[inline] | |||
| fn rposition(&mut self, predicate: |A| -> bool) -> Option<uint> { | |||
| let (lower, upper) = self.size_hint(); | |||
| assert!(upper == Some(lower)); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm guessing the removal of this is why you're reporting better numbers on the benchmark.
Right now clients of ExactSize typically include this test. I don't think all clients should be including the test, instead len() should do any assertions necessary, but I'm not sure if sneaking that into this PR is appropriate (especially since you're only updating one client and not all).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Doesn't len() (as defined just below) already include this same assertion, though?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh it already does the assertions? Then why is everyone using size_hint() and asserting manually?
|
r=me with the one change. |
Simplifying the code of methods: nth, fold, rposition and iterators: Filter, FilterMap, SkipWhile Adding basic benchmarks
|
@kballard Pushed the change. |
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 6, 2014
Simplifying the code of methods: `nth`, `fold`, `rposition`, and iterators: `Filter`, `FilterMap`, `SkipWhile`. ``` before test iter::bench_multiple_take ... bench: 15 ns/iter (+/- 0) test iter::bench_rposition ... bench: 349 ns/iter (+/- 94) test iter::bench_skip_while ... bench: 158 ns/iter (+/- 6) after test iter::bench_multiple_take ... bench: 15 ns/iter (+/- 0) test iter::bench_rposition ... bench: 314 ns/iter (+/- 2) test iter::bench_skip_while ... bench: 107 ns/iter (+/- 0) ``` @koalazen has the code for `Skip`. Once #16011 is fixed, `min_max` could use a for loop.
This was referenced Oct 22, 2022
lnicola
pushed a commit
to lnicola/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 3, 2024
minor: Render more crate information in status command
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.
Simplifying the code of methods:
nth,fold,rposition, and iterators:Filter,FilterMap,SkipWhile.@koalazen has the code for
Skip.Once #16011 is fixed,
min_maxcould use a for loop.