Use box syntax instead of Box::new in Mutex::remutex on Windows #49646
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
The Box::new(mem::uninitialized()) pattern actually actively copies uninitialized bytes from the stack into the box, which is a waste of time. Using the box syntax instead avoids the useless copy.
pietroalbini
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
|
It surprises me that this would make a difference, given that Just thinking aloud, I wonder if there's a way to fix |
pietroalbini
added
the
T-libs-api
|
Ping from triage! This PR needs a review. Can @withoutboats or someone else from @rust-lang/libs review this? |
|
@bors: r+ rollup |
|
📌 Commit 4577da7 has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
kennytm
added a commit
to kennytm/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 16, 2018
…richton Use box syntax instead of Box::new in Mutex::remutex on Windows The Box::new(mem::uninitialized()) pattern actually actively copies uninitialized bytes from the stack into the box, which is a waste of time. Using the box syntax instead avoids the useless copy.
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 16, 2018
Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - #49555 (Inline most of the code paths for conversions with boxed slices) - #49606 (Prevent broken pipes causing ICEs) - #49646 (Use box syntax instead of Box::new in Mutex::remutex on Windows) - #49647 (Remove `underscore_lifetimes` and `match_default_bindings` from active feature list) - #49931 (Fix incorrect span in `&mut` suggestion) - #49959 (rustbuild: allow building tools with debuginfo) - #49965 (Remove warning about f64->f32 cast being potential UB) - #49994 (Remove unnecessary indentation in rustdoc book codeblock.) Failed merges:
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 18, 2021
Remove box syntax from compiler and tools Removes box syntax from the compiler and tools. In rust-lang#49733, the future of box syntax is uncertain and the use in the compiler was listed as one of the reasons to keep it. Removal of box syntax [might affect the code generated](rust-lang#49646 (comment)) and slow down the compiler so I'd recommend doing a perf run on this.
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.
The Box::new(mem::uninitialized()) pattern actually actively copies
uninitialized bytes from the stack into the box, which is a waste of
time. Using the box syntax instead avoids the useless copy.