Fix recursion performance #61
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
gaurav-arya
force-pushed
the
ag-recurse
branch
from
22d0ecc to
75d0300
Compare
darsnack
approved these changes
Jan 17, 2023
ToucheSir
approved these changes
Jan 17, 2023
Co-authored-by: Brian Chen <ToucheSir@users.noreply.github.com>
|
I don't believe this has got a release? |
|
I don't remember why. Might've held off because of the recent TagBot issues that prevented tags and release notes from being published. See JuliaRegistries/General#77862 |
6 tasks
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 PR simplifies the recursive structure of walking a functor. It uses a trick from JuliaLang/julia#47760 to resolve #59.
The functionality of
fmapafter this PR is identical to its previous one. Thus, this PR lays bare the fact that the argumentfis ultimately useless for the version offmapthat takes a user-specified walk. Note that this was public API, however, so I kept it in the signature and added an explanatory note.Obviously the
fmapAPI is highly imperfect, but I think this PR is a strict improvement, that simply lays bare some of the issues. (Ultimately, I think that the use offmapwith a user-specified arbitrary walk should probably be deprecated: walks are just way too flexible to allow arbitrary walks to be paired withfmap. The semantics offmapseem to match best with the specific use case ofExcludeWalk:ExcludeWalkis what actually usesf, after all. The general function allowing for arbitrary walks should probably be calledrecursivewalkor something. But that would be very breaking.)