Skip to content

Optimize rposition #21897

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 4, 2015
Merged

Optimize rposition #21897

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 4, 2015

Conversation

dotdash
Copy link
Contributor

@dotdash dotdash commented Feb 3, 2015

The extra check caused by the expect() call can, in general, not be
optimized away, because the length of the iterator is unknown at compile
time, causing a noticable slow-down. Since the check only triggers if
the element isn't actually found in the iterator, i.e. it isn't
guaranteed to trigger for ill-behaved ExactSizeIterators, it seems
reasonable to switch to an implementation that doesn't need the check
and just always returns None if the value isn't found.

Benchmark:

let v: Vec<u8> = (0..1024*65).map(|_| 0).collect();
b.iter(|| {
    v.as_slice().iter().rposition(|&c| c == 1)
});

Before:

test rposition  ... bench:     49939 ns/iter (+/- 23)

After:

test rposition  ... bench:     33306 ns/iter (+/- 68)

The extra check caused by the expect() call can, in general, not be
optimized away, because the length of the iterator is unknown at compile
time, causing a noticable slow-down. Since the check only triggers if
the element isn't actually found in the iterator, i.e. it isn't
guaranteed to trigger for ill-behaved ExactSizeIterators, it seems
reasonable to switch to an implementation that doesn't need the check
and just always returns None if the value isn't found.

Benchmark:
````rust
let v: Vec<u8> = (0..1024*65).map(|_| 0).collect();
b.iter(|| {
    v.as_slice().iter().rposition(|&c| c == 1)
});
````

Before:
````
test rposition  ... bench:     49939 ns/iter (+/- 23)
````

After:
````
test rposition  ... bench:     33306 ns/iter (+/- 68)
````
@rust-highfive
Copy link
Contributor

r? @aturon

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

@bors: r+ 9a17f62 rollup

alexcrichton added a commit to alexcrichton/rust that referenced this pull request Feb 4, 2015
The extra check caused by the expect() call can, in general, not be
optimized away, because the length of the iterator is unknown at compile
time, causing a noticable slow-down. Since the check only triggers if
the element isn't actually found in the iterator, i.e. it isn't
guaranteed to trigger for ill-behaved ExactSizeIterators, it seems
reasonable to switch to an implementation that doesn't need the check
and just always returns None if the value isn't found.

Benchmark:
````rust
let v: Vec<u8> = (0..1024*65).map(|_| 0).collect();
b.iter(|| {
    v.as_slice().iter().rposition(|&c| c == 1)
});
````

Before:
````
test rposition  ... bench:     49939 ns/iter (+/- 23)
````

After:
````
test rposition  ... bench:     33306 ns/iter (+/- 68)
````
@bors bors merged commit 9a17f62 into rust-lang:master Feb 4, 2015
@dotdash dotdash deleted the rposition branch February 4, 2015 12:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants