-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.5k
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
Pool the buffer and encoder used for generic JSON reflection #602
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #602 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 97.47% 97.29% -0.18%
==========================================
Files 39 39
Lines 2017 2035 +18
==========================================
+ Hits 1966 1980 +14
- Misses 43 47 +4
Partials 8 8
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
ae8d2a1
to
930a571
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is awesome - great catch, Josh. One question about adding more mostly-duplicate tests. (Once again, my grand plan to split the zap
and zapcore
packages turns out to have been a bad idea.)
buf.Free() | ||
}) | ||
} | ||
} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Similar tests already exist in the top-level zap package; would we be better off changing the Makefile to pass coverpkg=all
instead of adding a new test suite?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For future reviewers: this turned into a yak shave, will fix it later.
13daf8a
to
9affa89
Compare
Hmm, that |
9affa89
to
63a5674
Compare
…ode coverage numbers
63a5674
to
93e77b2
Compare
…#602) Pool buffers and encoders to make JSON reflection less expensive.
No description provided.