-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Performance tweaks #95
Open
daveraja
wants to merge
7
commits into
master
Choose a base branch
from
performance_tweaks
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
e588234
Trivial tweaks to improve performance
daveraja 133a2d3
Use Predicate template for __bool__ and __len__
daveraja 19c31d1
Calculate the cached hash value for a fact at creation time
daveraja ee82644
Add a fact's sign to hash generation
daveraja 931d326
Comparison operators for Predicate map directly to the Symbol object
daveraja 56ea86e
Getting FactBase to work with new Predicate semantics
daveraja aeb1832
Passing current unit tests, but need to add more FactBase tests.
daveraja File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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 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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is this by intention that you have changed the bool expression? Before we have just checked for the length
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes the change was intentional. I was trying to think what was most intuitive from a user perspective.
Most importantly, I think clorm tuples should behave like a normal tuple as much as possible. So an empty tuple should evaluate to false.
But for a normal fact, even one with no parameters, I'm not sure it makes sense for it to evaluate to false. I think the following would be unintuitive:
Anyway, that was the rationale :)
In any case, It's a bit of a boundary case to define predicates with no parameters and clorm is not well suited to this use case. It's not very efficient or intuitive (every
P
instance is equivalent). Ideally it would be better to have a simpler mechanism for representing these cases. I just haven't come up with something that could also be made to fit nicely with the rest of clorm; unifiction, FactBases and the query stuff.