Conversation
…, do not update mut part on every lowering
|
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Split AST lowering resolver into mutable and readonly parts
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Finished benchmarking commit (34c6408): comparison URL. Overall result: ❌ regressions - please read the text belowBenchmarking this pull request means it may be perf-sensitive – we'll automatically label it not fit for rolling up. You can override this, but we strongly advise not to, due to possible changes in compiler perf. Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please do so in sufficient writing along with @bors rollup=never Instruction countOur most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.
Max RSS (memory usage)Results (secondary -2.3%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
CyclesThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Binary sizeResults (primary -0.0%, secondary -0.1%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
Bootstrap: 479.559s -> 479.738s (0.04%) |
|
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Split AST lowering resolver into mutable and readonly parts
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Split AST lowering resolver into mutable and readonly parts
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Finished benchmarking commit (3cf00c2): comparison URL. Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - no action neededBenchmarking this pull request means it may be perf-sensitive – we'll automatically label it not fit for rolling up. You can override this, but we strongly advise not to, due to possible changes in compiler perf. @bors rollup=never Instruction countOur most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.
Max RSS (memory usage)Results (primary -1.8%, secondary -1.0%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
CyclesResults (secondary -3.8%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
Binary sizeResults (primary -0.0%, secondary -0.1%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
Bootstrap: 480.488s -> 480.936s (0.09%) |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
8ff44bd to
787d10c
Compare
|
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Abstract AST lowering resolver
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Finished benchmarking commit (b90e46e): comparison URL. Overall result: no relevant changes - no action neededBenchmarking this pull request means it may be perf-sensitive – we'll automatically label it not fit for rolling up. You can override this, but we strongly advise not to, due to possible changes in compiler perf. @bors rollup=never Instruction countThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Max RSS (memory usage)This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. CyclesResults (secondary 3.9%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 481.08s -> 495.868s (3.07%) |
|
Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_ast_lowering/src/format.rs cc @m-ou-se |
View all comments
This PR abstracts AST lowering resolver through trait
ResolverAstLoweringExt.Second step for #153489.
r? @petrochenkov