-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.4k
In which we constantly improve the Vec(Deque) array PartialEq impls #63061
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
Conversation
@bors try |
In which we constantly improve the Vec(Deque) array PartialEq impls Use the same approach as in #62435 as sanctioned by #61415 (comment). r? @scottmcm
Diff looks good; r=me when you're through whatever perf stuff you're verifying. |
☀️ Try build successful - checks-azure |
@rust-timer build 39cf970 |
Argh... the timer bot seems broken... Let's not wait for it =P @bors r=scottmcm |
📌 Commit bfdfa85 has been approved by |
…ttmcm In which we constantly improve the Vec(Deque) array PartialEq impls Use the same approach as in rust-lang#62435 as sanctioned by rust-lang#61415 (comment). r? @scottmcm
…ttmcm In which we constantly improve the Vec(Deque) array PartialEq impls Use the same approach as in rust-lang#62435 as sanctioned by rust-lang#61415 (comment). r? @scottmcm
Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - #62550 (Implement RFC 2707 + Parser recovery for range patterns) - #62759 (Actually add rustc-guide to toolstate, don't fail builds for the guide) - #62806 (Fix few Clippy warnings) - #62974 (bump crossbeam-epoch dependency) - #63051 (Avoid ICE when referencing desugared local binding in borrow error) - #63061 (In which we constantly improve the Vec(Deque) array PartialEq impls) - #63067 (Add test for issue-50900) - #63071 (Allow rustbot to add `F-*` + `requires-nightly`.) Failed merges: r? @ghost
@rust-timer build 39cf970 |
Success: Queued 39cf970 with parent c798dff, comparison URL. |
Finished benchmarking try commit 39cf970, comparison URL. |
Nice; this caused some 0.5% to 2.2% improvements in some cases. 🎉 |
Use the same approach as in #62435 as sanctioned by #61415 (comment).
r? @scottmcm