-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 622
perf: use FxHashSet for O(1) name lookups in declaration instantiation #5024
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
Open
tkshsbcue
wants to merge
5
commits into
boa-dev:main
Choose a base branch
from
tkshsbcue:perf/hashset-declaration-lookups
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+36
−61
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
f37cb06
perf: use FxHashSet for O(1) name lookups in declaration instantiation
tkshsbcue 38c6905
Merge branch 'main' into perf/hashset-declaration-lookups
jedel1043 3f38608
style: fix formatting in declarations.rs
tkshsbcue fd75f4a
refactor: drop parallel Vec for declared_var_names, use FxHashSet only
tkshsbcue cf628f7
style: drop empty if blocks left over from Vec->FxHashSet conversion
tkshsbcue File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
the doc of
lexically_declared_namessays:what cases will result in duplicates here? 🤔
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Duplicates can occur in the !strict branch via Annex B e.g. sibling blocks each declaring the same function name, or repeated function bindings across nested CaseClauses. That said, dedup isn't really the goal of the change here; the loop below does .contains(&f) for every Annex B function name, so the win is O(1) lookup vs O(n) scan. I'll update the commit message / PR description to make that the stated motivation rather than "duplicates"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
my concern is whether or not the preservation of duplicates is necessary here for correctness/spec-compliance
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No dedup is safe here. The only use of lexically_declared_names in this block is the .contains(&f) membership check in the Annex B loop below: