Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Removing recursion in array.fs where it is may be worthwhile - #1439
Merged
Conversation
msftclas
commented
Aug 15, 2016
Hi @jackmott, I'm your friendly neighborhood Microsoft Pull Request Bot (You can call me MSBOT). Thanks for your contribution! The agreement was validated by Microsoft and real humans are currently evaluating your PR. TTYL, MSBOT; |
KevinRansom
commented
Aug 16, 2016
Contributor
This is great. Thank you |
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 freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
I went through testing for opportunities to improve performance when recursive versions could be turned into explicit loops. For many cases it was a very small difference - 1% to 2%. If that is deemed worthwhile I can roll those into this PR (would include functions like pick, and find, etc)
compareWith got a 20% performance improvement so seems like an clear win. concat was a very small performance improvement, but I was also able to bring it down from 4 functions to just 2, so it is arguably simpler as well. I could pull this out though if the recursive implementation is preferred.
compareWith
concat (where length is how many arrays are being concatted, each array being 5 elements)
environment for tests