| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
Benchmark results with LLVM 21 on LA664:
```
OLD:
test bench_is_contained_in ... bench: 43.63 ns/iter (+/- 0.04)
NEW:
test bench_is_contained_in ... bench: 12.81 ns/iter (+/- 0.01)
```
|
|
This reverts commit 245bf503e2a948ac98170516d11df632e85a948b.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The previous version used `['l', 'l']` as pattern, which would suggest that it matches the `ll` of `Hello world` as a whole.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The previous commit updated `rustfmt.toml` appropriately. This commit is
the outcome of running `x fmt --all` with the new formatting options.
|
|
Use a GAT for `Searcher` associated type because this trait is always
implemented for every lifetime anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
feat: implement `DoubleEndedSearcher` for `CharArray[Ref]Searcher`
This PR implements `DoubleEndedSearcher` for both `CharArraySearcher` and `CharArrayRefSearcher`. I'm not sure whether this was just overlooked or if there is a reason for it, but since it behaves exactly like `CharSliceSearcher`, I think the implementations should be appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
These examples were listed twice and also were confusable with doing a substring match instead of a any-of-set match.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- bump simd compare to 32bytes
- import small slice compare code from memmem crate
- try a few different probe bytes to avoid degenerate cases
- but special-case 2-byte needles
|
|
Based on Wojciech Muła's "SIMD-friendly algorithms for substring searching"[0]
The two-way algorithm is Big-O efficient but it needs to preprocess the needle
to find a "criticla factorization" of it. This additional work is significant
for short needles. Additionally it mostly advances needle.len() bytes at a time.
The SIMD-based approach used here on the other hand can advance based on its
vector width, which can exceed the needle length. Except for pathological cases,
but due to being limited to small needles the worst case blowup is also small.
benchmarks taken on a Zen2:
```
16CGU, OLD:
test str::bench_contains_short_short ... bench: 27 ns/iter (+/- 1)
test str::bench_contains_short_long ... bench: 667 ns/iter (+/- 29)
test str::bench_contains_bad_naive ... bench: 131 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test str::bench_contains_bad_simd ... bench: 130 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test str::bench_contains_equal ... bench: 148 ns/iter (+/- 4)
16CGU, NEW:
test str::bench_contains_short_short ... bench: 8 ns/iter (+/- 0)
test str::bench_contains_short_long ... bench: 135 ns/iter (+/- 4)
test str::bench_contains_bad_naive ... bench: 130 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test str::bench_contains_bad_simd ... bench: 292 ns/iter (+/- 1)
test str::bench_contains_equal ... bench: 3 ns/iter (+/- 0)
1CGU, OLD:
test str::bench_contains_short_short ... bench: 30 ns/iter (+/- 0)
test str::bench_contains_short_long ... bench: 713 ns/iter (+/- 17)
test str::bench_contains_bad_naive ... bench: 131 ns/iter (+/- 3)
test str::bench_contains_bad_simd ... bench: 130 ns/iter (+/- 3)
test str::bench_contains_equal ... bench: 148 ns/iter (+/- 6)
1CGU, NEW:
test str::bench_contains_short_short ... bench: 10 ns/iter (+/- 0)
test str::bench_contains_short_long ... bench: 111 ns/iter (+/- 0)
test str::bench_contains_bad_naive ... bench: 135 ns/iter (+/- 3)
test str::bench_contains_bad_simd ... bench: 274 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test str::bench_contains_equal ... bench: 4 ns/iter (+/- 0)
```
[0] http://0x80.pl/articles/simd-strfind.html#sse-avx2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This will not affect ABI since the other variant of the enum is bigger.
It may break some code, but that would be very strange: usually people
don't continue after the first `Done` (or `None` for a normal iterator).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
