| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
Btreemap iter intertwined
3 commits:
1. Introduced benchmarks for `BTreeMap::iter()`. Benchmarks named `iter_20` were of the whole iteration process, so I renamed them. Also the benchmarks of `range` that I wrote earlier weren't very good. I included an (awkwardly named) one that compares `iter()` to `range(..)` on the same set, because the contrast is surprising:
```
name ns/iter
btree::map::range_unbounded_unbounded 28,176
btree::map::range_unbounded_vs_iter 89,369
```
Both dig up the same pair of leaf edges. `range(..)` also checks that some keys are correctly ordered, the only thing `iter()` does more is to copy the map's length.
2. Slightly refactoring the code to what I find more readable (not in chronological order of discovery), boosts performance:
```
>cargo-benchcmp.exe benchcmp a1 a2 --threshold 5
name a1 ns/iter a2 ns/iter diff ns/iter diff % speedup
btree::map::find_rand_100 18 17 -1 -5.56% x 1.06
btree::map::first_and_last_10k 64 71 7 10.94% x 0.90
btree::map::iter_0 2,939 2,209 -730 -24.84% x 1.33
btree::map::iter_1 6,845 2,696 -4,149 -60.61% x 2.54
btree::map::iter_100 8,556 3,672 -4,884 -57.08% x 2.33
btree::map::iter_10k 9,292 5,884 -3,408 -36.68% x 1.58
btree::map::iter_1m 10,268 6,510 -3,758 -36.60% x 1.58
btree::map::iteration_mut_100000 478,575 453,050 -25,525 -5.33% x 1.06
btree::map::range_unbounded_unbounded 28,176 36,169 7,993 28.37% x 0.78
btree::map::range_unbounded_vs_iter 89,369 38,290 -51,079 -57.16% x 2.33
btree::set::clone_100_and_remove_all 4,801 4,245 -556 -11.58% x 1.13
btree::set::clone_10k_and_remove_all 529,450 496,030 -33,420 -6.31% x 1.07
```
But you can tell from the `range_unbounded_*` lines that, despite an unwarranted, vengeful attack on the range_unbounded_unbounded benchmark, this change still doesn't allow `iter()` to catch up with `range(..)`.
3. I guess that `range(..)` copes so well because it intertwines the leftmost and rightmost descend towards leaf edges, doing the two root node accesses close together, perhaps exploiting a CPU's internal pipelining? So the third commit distils a version of `range_search` (which we can't use directly because of the `Ord` bound), and we get another boost:
```
cargo-benchcmp.exe benchcmp a2 a3 --threshold 5
name a2 ns/iter a3 ns/iter diff ns/iter diff % speedup
btree::map::first_and_last_100 40 43 3 7.50% x 0.93
btree::map::first_and_last_10k 71 64 -7 -9.86% x 1.11
btree::map::iter_0 2,209 1,719 -490 -22.18% x 1.29
btree::map::iter_1 2,696 2,205 -491 -18.21% x 1.22
btree::map::iter_100 3,672 2,943 -729 -19.85% x 1.25
btree::map::iter_10k 5,884 3,929 -1,955 -33.23% x 1.50
btree::map::iter_1m 6,510 5,532 -978 -15.02% x 1.18
btree::map::iteration_mut_100000 453,050 476,667 23,617 5.21% x 0.95
btree::map::range_included_excluded 405,075 371,297 -33,778 -8.34% x 1.09
btree::map::range_included_included 427,577 397,440 -30,137 -7.05% x 1.08
btree::map::range_unbounded_unbounded 36,169 28,175 -7,994 -22.10% x 1.28
btree::map::range_unbounded_vs_iter 38,290 30,838 -7,452 -19.46% x 1.24
```
But I think this is just fake news from the microbenchmarking media. `iter()` is still trying to catch up with `range(..)`. And we can sure do without another function. So I would skip this 3rd commit.
r? @Mark-Simulacrum
|
|
r=jonas-schievink
Update btree_map::VacantEntry::insert docs to actually call insert
It looks like they were copied from the `or_insert` docs. This change
makes the example more like the hash_map::VacantEntry::insert docs.
|
|
It looks like they were copied from the `or_insert` docs. This change
makes the example more like the hash_map::VacantEntry::insert docs.
|
|
|
|
The `remove_current` method only returns the inner `T` and deallocates the list node. This is unnecessary for move operations, where the element is going to be linked back into this (or even a different) `LinkedList`. The `remove_current_as_list` method avoids this by returning the unlinked list node as a new single-element `LinkedList` structure .
|
|
remove Unique::from for shared pointer types
r? @SimonSapin
|
|
|
|
Fix stable(since) attribute for BTreeMap::remove_entry
Stabilized in #70712.
Maybe checking that the since attributes are added correctly should be automated through tidy? This is the third PR I'm opening that fixes a stable(since) attribute for something meant to be stabilized in 1.43 / 1.44 initially but then only stabilized in 1.45. (the other two are #71571, #71574)
|
|
|
|
clippy::{redundant_pattern_matching, clone_on_copy, iter_cloned_collect, option_as_ref_deref, match_ref_pats}
|
|
Add missing Send and Sync impls for linked list Cursor and CursorMut.
Someone pointed out these to me, and i think it's indeed reasonable to add those impl.
r? @Amanieu
|
|
Deprecate `{Box,Rc,Arc}::into_raw_non_null`
Per ongoing FCP at https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/47336#issuecomment-586589016
See also https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/47336#issuecomment-614054164
|
|
stabilize BTreeMap::remove_entry
This PR stabilizes `BTreeMap::remove_entry` as implemented in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/68378.
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/66714
|
|
Co-Authored-By: Amanieu d'Antras <amanieu@gmail.com>
|
|
Take a single root node in range_search
The unsafe code can be justified within range_search, as it makes sure to not
overlap the returned references, but from the callers perspective it's an
entirely safe algorithm and there's no need for the caller to know about the
duplication.
cc @ssomers
r? @Amanieu
|
|
|
|
Add BinaryHeap::retain as suggested in #42849
This PR implements retain for BinaryHeap as suggested in #42849.
This is my first PR for Rust, so please let me know if I should be doing anything differently, thanks!
|
|
|
|
The unsafe code can be justified within range_search, as it makes sure to not
overlap the returned references, but from the callers perspective it's an
entirely safe algorithm and there's no need for the caller to know about the
duplication.
|
|
more compact way to adjust test sizes for Miri
Inspired by @dtolnay
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This adds a couple of more diagnostic items to be used in Clippy.
I chose these particular ones because they were the types which we seem
to check for the most in Clippy. I'm not sure if the
`cfg_attr(not(test))` is needed, but it was also used for `Vec` and a
few other types.
|
|
big-O notation: parenthesis for function calls, explicit multiplication
I saw `O(n m log n)` in the docs and found that really hard to parse. In particular, I don't think we should use blank space as syntax for *both* multiplication and function calls, that is just confusing.
This PR makes both multiplication and function calls explicit using Rust-like syntax. If you prefer, I can also leave one of them implicit, but I believe explicit is better here.
While I was at it I also added backticks consistently.
|
|
|
|
Dogfood or_patterns in the standard library
We can start using `or_patterns` in the standard library as a step toward stabilization.
cc #54883 @Centril
|
|
1. Changed descriptions of `fn get` & `fn get_mut`.
Since both of these functions are returning references, and not the owned value, I thought the doc comments could be fixed to be consistent with doc comments of `fn front` & `fn front_mut`.
2. Other changes are minor fixes or additions for clarification.
Thank you for taking a look :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/47336#issuecomment-586589016
|
|
|
|
Add or_insert_with_key to Entry of HashMap/BTreeMap
Going along with `or_insert_with`, `or_insert_with_key` provides the `Entry`'s key to the lambda, avoiding the need to either clone the key or the need to reimplement this body of this method from scratch each time.
This is useful when the initial value for a map entry is derived from the key. For example, the introductory Rust book has an example Cacher struct that takes an expensive-to-compute lambda and then can, given an argument to the lambda, produce either the cached result or execute the lambda.
---
I'm fairly new to Rust, so any optimizations, corrections to types, better names, better documentation, or whatever else would be appreciated. I'd like to thank Arnavion on freenode for helping me to implement a very similar method when I found that `or_insert_with_key` was unavailable.
As a somewhat-related note, this implements https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues/1202 from 2015, so if this pull request is accepted, that should be closed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Going along with or_insert_with, or_insert_with_key provides the
Entry's key to the lambda, avoiding the need to either clone the
key or the need to reimplement this body of this method from
scratch each time.
This is useful when the initial value for a map entry is derived
from the key. For example, the introductory Rust book has an
example Cacher struct that takes an expensive-to-compute lambda and
then can, given an argument to the lambda, produce either the
cached result or execute the lambda.
|
|
Rearrange BTreeMap::into_iter to match range_mut.
r? @Mark-Simulacrum
I wondered why you catered for the optional root differently in `into_iter` than in `range_mut`.
|
|
Follow up on BTreeMap comments
r? @Amanieu (for the first commit)
|
|
Remove the Ord bound that was plaguing drain_filter
Now that #70795 made it superfluous. Also removes superfluous lifetime specifiers (at least I think they are).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
add tracking issue to `VecDeque::make_contiguous`
The tracking issue is https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/70929
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Keep track of position when deleting from a BTreeMap
This improves the performance of drain_filter and is needed for future Cursor support for BTreeMap.
cc @ssomers
r? @Mark-Simulacrum
|
|
Don't import integer and float modules, use assoc consts
Stop importing the standard library integer and float modules to reach the `MIN`, `MAX` and other constants. They are available directly on the primitive types now.
This PR is a follow up of #69860 which made sure we use the new constants in documentation.
This type of change touches a lot of files, and previously all my assoc int consts PRs had collisions and were accepted only after a long delay. So I'd prefer to do it in smaller steps now. Just removing these imports seem like a good next step.
r? @dtolnay
|
