several changes for 0.4.0: #3
Conversation
jbr
commented
Aug 11, 2021
jbr
commented
- add support for dots
- slight perf improvement through use of smartstring
- removes reverse match, replaces it with Route::template
* add support for dots * slight perf improvement through use of smartstring * removes reverse match, replaces it with Route::template
| @@ -1,10 +1,13 @@ | |||
| #![forbid(unsafe_code, future_incompatible)] | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Prefer if this was instead moved into deny?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Future incompatible is warn by default and that seems reasonable. I've been trying to standardize my default set of lints across projects, so this was just pasting in my updated version. I can't remember why I took out forbid future incompatible at some point
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Probably because of rust-lang/rust#81670
| @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@ | |||
| use crate::Segment; | |||
| use crate::{Captures, Match, ReverseMatch, Segment}; | |||
| use smartstring::alias::String as SmartString; | |||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| /// Returns a vec of captured str slices for this routespec | ||
| #[inline] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is this really the right choice here and/or above?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah these were both driven by the criterion benches. I don't have enough confidence in my understanding of rustc to add something like this without before/after benchmarks. It helped a statistically significant amount
src/route.rs
Outdated
| fn from(segments: Vec<Segment>) -> Self { | ||
| Self { | ||
| segments, | ||
| source: SmartString::new(), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this not used for display and whatnot? I.e. should this reverse build this string?
