restrict the state argument to iterate to Int64 for some ranges
#57593
+1
−1
Conversation
This file contains 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
This seems like it should eliminate a great number of invalidations when defining a new subtype of `Integer`, according to SnoopCompile.jl and friends. This is correct because: * the state starts from zero * `iterate` doesn't ever skip any state, that is, each successive state is visited during iteration * it's not physically possible to iterate all the way from zero to `typemax(Int64)`
|
|
blocked by #57261 |
Sign up for free
to 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This seems like it should eliminate a great number of invalidations when defining a new subtype of
Integer, according to SnoopCompile.jl and friends.This is correct because:
iteratedoesn't ever skip any state, that is, each successive state is visited during iterationtypemax(Int64)