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
Consider rolling back optimizations for List, collections from 2.11 compiler tuning to the collections themselves. #8240
Comments
Imported From: https://issues.scala-lang.org/browse/SI-8240?orig=1 |
@Ichoran said: |
@Ichoran said: |
@Ichoran said: |
@Ichoran said: |
@pavelpavlov said:
class List[T] { |
@pavelpavlov said: |
@retronym said: |
@Ichoran said: |
@Ichoran said (edited on Feb 14, 2014 3:17:39 AM UTC): |
@adriaanm said: |
I found that using specialized code rather than:
List#{map, collect, nonEmpty, isEmpty}
gave small but measurable performance wins the compiler on hot paths.
Hypothoses:
We should see if we could reproduce these results in a compiler-free microbenchmark of collections and roll the improvements back.
Care must be taken when introducing overloads in List that we don't go backwards in call sites that oscilate between a variety of collections (in the compiler we almost always use List).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: