Closed
Conversation
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
jyn514
approved these changes
Jan 25, 2021
Member
|
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
Collaborator
|
Awaiting bors try build completion. |
Collaborator
|
⌛ Trying commit 72714045bcef9602165ec5376176eedcbb6a29d6 with merge ebab311de03ff14c990664443188bbabc3bc4a4d... |
jyn514
added
I-compiletime
Contributor
Author
|
I'm not sure this will show up anywhere. I'm not even sure if this will show up in windows-rs, but I'm too lazy to start another 30 minute session for that. |
Member
|
This function gets called a lot, I wouldn't be surprised if this has an outsized effect. |
bugadani
force-pushed
the
rustdoc-perf
branch
from
635b2c6 to
71e71ce
Compare
Contributor
|
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
Collaborator
|
Awaiting bors try build completion. |
Collaborator
|
⌛ Trying commit 71e71ce83a95f1c9dfe08687ae2752f0abf7d6f6 with merge 6adb44aa6484fbc0ed095296cacb1f769f7f916d... |
Collaborator
|
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
Collaborator
|
Queued 6adb44aa6484fbc0ed095296cacb1f769f7f916d with parent ff6ee2a, future comparison URL. @rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf |
rustbot
added
the
S-waiting-on-perf
Collaborator
|
Finished benchmarking try commit (6adb44aa6484fbc0ed095296cacb1f769f7f916d): comparison url. Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. Please note that if the perf results are neutral, you should likely undo the rollup=never given below by specifying Importantly, though, if the results of this run are non-neutral do not roll this PR up -- it will mask other regressions or improvements in the roll up. @bors rollup=never |
rustbot
removed
the
S-waiting-on-perf
Contributor
Author
|
That's a big nothing on the current benchmarks. Wonder if this has any effect on windows-docs-rs... |
Member
|
With https://github.com/kennytm/rustup-toolchain-install-master you can install the try build locally using |
Contributor
Author
|
Thanks. The issue is not how to try (although thank you for the link, I didn't know I could reuse CI builds!), it's when to do so - that build is 30 minutes and using my PC in that time probably only decreases the reliability of such a test. But I'll do my best :) |
bugadani
force-pushed
the
rustdoc-perf
branch
from
71e71ce to
39531e0
Compare
Collaborator
|
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot) |
Collaborator
|
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot) |
bugadani
force-pushed
the
rustdoc-perf
branch
from
84c2d0d to
b272ca8
Compare
bugadani
force-pushed
the
rustdoc-perf
branch
from
71a8f93 to
c9c1200
Compare
Member
|
Ok, time to clean up the commits in case you want to keep multiple ones! :D Otherwise I'll simply ask bors to squash. As you prefer! |
Contributor
Author
|
Huh, bors can squash? If anything's good, it's good to go squashed I think. |
Member
|
It has a |
Contributor
Author
|
Go for it :) |
Member
|
Thanks for your work! @bors: r+ squash |
Collaborator
|
📌 Commit c9c1200 has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
Collaborator
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 30, 2021
rustdoc tweaking * Reuse memory * simplify `next_def_id`, avoid multiple hashing and unnecessary lookups * remove `all_fake_def_ids`, use the global map instead (probably not a good step toward parallelization, though...) * convert `add_deref_target` to iterative implementation * use `ArrayVec` where we know the max number of elements * minor touchups here and there * avoid building temporary vectors that get appended to other vectors At most places I may or may not be doing the compiler's job is this PR.
Collaborator
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
This was referenced Jan 30, 2021
Contributor
Author
|
Ah so the bors squash is the reason some code points the blame at bors... Now I know. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
10 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
next_def_id, avoid multiple hashing and unnecessary lookupsall_fake_def_ids, use the global map instead (probably not a good step toward parallelization, though...)add_deref_targetto iterative implementationArrayVecwhere we know the max number of elementsAt most places I may or may not be doing the compiler's job is this PR.