Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

Hasher: replace unsafe trasmute with to_ne_bytes #59982

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 15, 2019

Conversation

stepancheg
Copy link
Contributor

Spead the knowledge of to_ne_bytes functions existence.

Spead the knowledge of `to_ne_bytes` functions existence.
@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

r? @rkruppe

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

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Apr 15, 2019
@hanna-kruppe
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks!

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Apr 15, 2019

📌 Commit fd4ac0e has been approved by rkruppe

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Apr 15, 2019
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Apr 15, 2019

⌛ Testing commit fd4ac0e with merge a55f6be...

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 15, 2019
Hasher: replace unsafe trasmute with to_ne_bytes

Spead the knowledge of `to_ne_bytes` functions existence.
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Apr 15, 2019

☀️ Test successful - checks-travis, status-appveyor
Approved by: rkruppe
Pushing a55f6be to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Apr 15, 2019
@bors bors merged commit fd4ac0e into rust-lang:master Apr 15, 2019
@bors bors mentioned this pull request Apr 15, 2019
Dylan-DPC-zz pushed a commit to Dylan-DPC-zz/rust that referenced this pull request Jun 28, 2020
Forward Hash::write_iN to Hash::write_uN

The `Hasher::write_iN()` methods should forward to `Hasher::write_uN()`, because some Hasher implementations implement only the `write_uN()` variants, with the expectation that `write_iN()` will use the same implementation. Most notably, this is the case for the [FxHasher](https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc-hash/blob/5e09ea0a1c7ab7e4f9e27771f5a0e5a36c58d1bb/src/lib.rs#L111) used by rustc itself.

This used to be the case previously, but was broken in rust-lang#59982. As the PR description makes no mention of this particular change, I assume it was unintentional.

In a local test, this mitigates the regression from rust-lang#73526 on at least one test-case (cc @cuviper), because we're no longer at the mercy of `FxHasher::write()` getting inlined to get reasonable performance.
Manishearth added a commit to Manishearth/rust that referenced this pull request Jun 28, 2020
Forward Hash::write_iN to Hash::write_uN

The `Hasher::write_iN()` methods should forward to `Hasher::write_uN()`, because some Hasher implementations implement only the `write_uN()` variants, with the expectation that `write_iN()` will use the same implementation. Most notably, this is the case for the [FxHasher](https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc-hash/blob/5e09ea0a1c7ab7e4f9e27771f5a0e5a36c58d1bb/src/lib.rs#L111) used by rustc itself.

This used to be the case previously, but was broken in rust-lang#59982. As the PR description makes no mention of this particular change, I assume it was unintentional.

In a local test, this mitigates the regression from rust-lang#73526 on at least one test-case (cc @cuviper), because we're no longer at the mercy of `FxHasher::write()` getting inlined to get reasonable performance.
Manishearth added a commit to Manishearth/rust that referenced this pull request Jun 28, 2020
Forward Hash::write_iN to Hash::write_uN

The `Hasher::write_iN()` methods should forward to `Hasher::write_uN()`, because some Hasher implementations implement only the `write_uN()` variants, with the expectation that `write_iN()` will use the same implementation. Most notably, this is the case for the [FxHasher](https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc-hash/blob/5e09ea0a1c7ab7e4f9e27771f5a0e5a36c58d1bb/src/lib.rs#L111) used by rustc itself.

This used to be the case previously, but was broken in rust-lang#59982. As the PR description makes no mention of this particular change, I assume it was unintentional.

In a local test, this mitigates the regression from rust-lang#73526 on at least one test-case (cc @cuviper), because we're no longer at the mercy of `FxHasher::write()` getting inlined to get reasonable performance.
# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants