Simplify expansion for format_args!(). #139131
Conversation
Instead of calling new(), we can just use a struct expression directly.
Before:
Placeholder::new(…, …, …, …)
After:
Placeholder {
position: …,
flags: …,
width: …,
precision: …,
}
|
r? @spastorino rustbot has assigned @spastorino. Use |
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
rustbot
added
the
S-waiting-on-perf
…try>
Simplify expansion for format_args!().
Instead of calling `Placeholder::new()`, we can just use a struct expression directly.
Before:
```rust
Placeholder::new(…, …, …, …)
```
After:
```rust
Placeholder {
position: …,
flags: …,
width: …,
precision: …,
}
```
(I originally avoided the struct expression, because `Placeholder` had a lot of fields. But now that rust-lang#136974 is merged, it only has four fields left.)
This will make the `fmt` argument to `fmt::Arguments::new_v1_formatted()` a candidate for const promotion, which is important if we ever hope to fix rust-lang#92698 (It doesn't change anything yet though, because the `args` argument to `fmt::Arguments::new_v1_formatted()` is not const-promotable.)
|
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Finished benchmarking commit (3fa54aa): comparison URL. Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action neededBenchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. While you can manually mark this PR as fit for rollup, we strongly recommend not doing so since this PR may lead to changes in compiler perf. @bors rollup=never Instruction countThis is the most reliable metric that we have; it was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment. However, even this metric can sometimes exhibit noise.
Max RSS (memory usage)Results (primary -0.7%)This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
CyclesResults (secondary -5.2%)This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
Binary sizeResults (primary -0.0%, secondary -0.1%)This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
Bootstrap: 776.851s -> 776.071s (-0.10%) |
rustbot
removed
the
S-waiting-on-perf
|
Nice! |
|
@bors r+ |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
…iler-errors Improve hir_pretty for struct expressions. While working on rust-lang#139131 I noticed the hir pretty printer outputs an empty line between each field, and is also missing a space before the `{` and the `}`: ```rust let a = StructWithSomeFields{ field_1: 1, field_2: 2, field_3: 3, field_4: 4, field_5: 5, field_6: 6,}; let a = StructWithSomeFields{ field_1: 1, field_2: 2, ..a}; ``` This changes it to: ```rust let a = StructWithSomeFields { field_1: 1, field_2: 2, field_3: 3, field_4: 4, field_5: 5, field_6: 6 }; let a = StructWithSomeFields { field_1: 1, field_2: 2, ..a }; ```
|
you may want to update the PR description so it doesn't auto-close #92698 |
…iler-errors Improve hir_pretty for struct expressions. While working on rust-lang#139131 I noticed the hir pretty printer outputs an empty line between each field, and is also missing a space before the `{` and the `}`: ```rust let a = StructWithSomeFields{ field_1: 1, field_2: 2, field_3: 3, field_4: 4, field_5: 5, field_6: 6,}; let a = StructWithSomeFields{ field_1: 1, field_2: 2, ..a}; ``` This changes it to: ```rust let a = StructWithSomeFields { field_1: 1, field_2: 2, field_3: 3, field_4: 4, field_5: 5, field_6: 6 }; let a = StructWithSomeFields { field_1: 1, field_2: 2, ..a }; ```
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
What is this?This is an experimental post-merge analysis report that shows differences in test outcomes between the merged PR and its parent PR.Comparing fedf107 (parent) -> 2ea33b5 (this PR) Test differencesShow 4 test diffsAdditionally, 4 doctest diffs were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy. Job group index Job duration changes
How to interpret the job duration changes?Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance |
|
Finished benchmarking commit (2ea33b5): comparison URL. Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - please read the text belowOur benchmarks found a performance regression caused by this PR. Next Steps:
@rustbot label: +perf-regression Instruction countThis is the most reliable metric that we have; it was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment. However, even this metric can sometimes exhibit noise.
Max RSS (memory usage)Results (primary -2.5%, secondary -2.7%)This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
CyclesResults (secondary 3.3%)This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
Binary sizeResults (primary -0.0%, secondary -0.1%)This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
Bootstrap: 776.216s -> 776.873s (0.08%) |
Rollup merge of rust-lang#139132 - m-ou-se:hir-pp-struct-expr, r=compiler-errors Improve hir_pretty for struct expressions. While working on rust-lang#139131 I noticed the hir pretty printer outputs an empty line between each field, and is also missing a space before the `{` and the `}`: ```rust let a = StructWithSomeFields{ field_1: 1, field_2: 2, field_3: 3, field_4: 4, field_5: 5, field_6: 6,}; let a = StructWithSomeFields{ field_1: 1, field_2: 2, ..a}; ``` This changes it to: ```rust let a = StructWithSomeFields { field_1: 1, field_2: 2, field_3: 3, field_4: 4, field_5: 5, field_6: 6 }; let a = StructWithSomeFields { field_1: 1, field_2: 2, ..a }; ```
|
Perf triage: Single regression in @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged |
rustbot
added
the
perf-regression-triaged
…ark-Simulacrum
Simplify expansion for format_args!().
Instead of calling `Placeholder::new()`, we can just use a struct expression directly.
Before:
```rust
Placeholder::new(…, …, …, …)
```
After:
```rust
Placeholder {
position: …,
flags: …,
width: …,
precision: …,
}
```
(I originally avoided the struct expression, because `Placeholder` had a lot of fields. But now that rust-lang#136974 is merged, it only has four fields left.)
This will make the `fmt` argument to `fmt::Arguments::new_v1_formatted()` a candidate for const promotion, which is important if we ever hope to tackle rust-lang#92698 (It doesn't change anything yet though, because the `args` argument to `fmt::Arguments::new_v1_formatted()` is not const-promotable.)
Instead of calling
Placeholder::new(), we can just use a struct expression directly.Before:
After:
(I originally avoided the struct expression, because
Placeholderhad a lot of fields. But now that #136974 is merged, it only has four fields left.)This will make the
fmtargument tofmt::Arguments::new_v1_formatted()a candidate for const promotion, which is important if we ever hope to tackle #92698 (It doesn't change anything yet though, because theargsargument tofmt::Arguments::new_v1_formatted()is not const-promotable.)