ES2020 optimizations#3687
Closed
JoviDeCroock wants to merge 6 commits into
Closed
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for compassionate-pike-271cb3 ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings. |
| for (const [responseName, fieldNodes] of fields.entries()) { | ||
| const fieldsEntries = Array.from(fields.entries()); | ||
| for (let i = 0; i < fieldsEntries.length; i++) { | ||
| const { 0: responseName, 1: fieldNodes } = fieldsEntries[i]; |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| const { 0: responseName, 1: fieldNodes } = fieldsEntries[i]; | |
| const [responseName, fieldNodes] = fieldsEntries[i]; |
This version is less wierd
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That version invokes the iterator and is very slow though
IvanGoncharov
added a commit
to IvanGoncharov/graphql-js
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 10, 2022
Explanation: `Object.create(null)` returns value of `any` type. So bellow construct is not reported by TS even in "strict" mode: ```ts const foo = Object.create(null); ``` Fixing this issue in `extendSchema` requires adding more code since we can't put all extensions nodes into one collection without loosing typesafety.
IvanGoncharov
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 10, 2022
Explanation: `Object.create(null)` returns value of `any` type. So bellow construct is not reported by TS even in "strict" mode: ```ts const foo = Object.create(null); ``` Fixing this issue in `extendSchema` requires adding more code since we can't put all extensions nodes into one collection without loosing typesafety.
IvanGoncharov
added a commit
to IvanGoncharov/graphql-js
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 11, 2022
Context: I wanted to try more automatic alternative to graphql#3687 that allows us to continue using ES6 features without perfomance lost.
Member
|
@JoviDeCroock Thanks for PR and research. BTW, your branch is still faster in some tests but slower in others: |
Contributor
Author
|
@IvanGoncharov #3691 optimizes some problematic ones, you might want to add a plugin like https://babeljs.io/docs/en/babel-plugin-transform-destructuring or the one from react-hooks because they transform If you want I can also close this as your transform approach looks better to me, thank you! EDIT: if you want I can write that transformer as well |
IvanGoncharov
added a commit
to IvanGoncharov/graphql-js
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 11, 2022
Context: I wanted to try more automatic alternative to graphql#3687 that allows us to continue using ES6 features without perfomance lost.
yaacovCR
pushed a commit
to yaacovCR/graphql-js
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 11, 2025
Explanation: `Object.create(null)` returns value of `any` type. So bellow construct is not reported by TS even in "strict" mode: ```ts const foo = Object.create(null); ``` Fixing this issue in `extendSchema` requires adding more code since we can't put all extensions nodes into one collection without loosing typesafety.
yaacovCR
pushed a commit
to yaacovCR/graphql-js
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 11, 2025
Explanation: `Object.create(null)` returns value of `any` type. So bellow construct is not reported by TS even in "strict" mode: ```ts const foo = Object.create(null); ``` Fixing this issue in `extendSchema` requires adding more code since we can't put all extensions nodes into one collection without loosing typesafety.
yaacovCR
pushed a commit
to yaacovCR/graphql-js
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 11, 2025
Explanation: `Object.create(null)` returns value of `any` type. So bellow construct is not reported by TS even in "strict" mode: ```ts const foo = Object.create(null); ``` Fixing this issue in `extendSchema` requires adding more code since we can't put all extensions nodes into one collection without loosing typesafety.
yaacovCR
pushed a commit
to yaacovCR/graphql-js
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 11, 2025
Explanation: `Object.create(null)` returns value of `any` type. So bellow construct is not reported by TS even in "strict" mode: ```ts const foo = Object.create(null); ``` Fixing this issue in `extendSchema` requires adding more code since we can't put all extensions nodes into one collection without loosing typesafety.
yaacovCR
pushed a commit
to yaacovCR/graphql-js
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 16, 2025
Explanation: `Object.create(null)` returns value of `any` type. So bellow construct is not reported by TS even in "strict" mode: ```ts const foo = Object.create(null); ``` Fixing this issue in `extendSchema` requires adding more code since we can't put all extensions nodes into one collection without loosing typesafety.
yaacovCR
pushed a commit
to yaacovCR/graphql-js
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 17, 2025
Explanation: `Object.create(null)` returns value of `any` type. So bellow construct is not reported by TS even in "strict" mode: ```ts const foo = Object.create(null); ``` Fixing this issue in `extendSchema` requires adding more code since we can't put all extensions nodes into one collection without loosing typesafety.
yaacovCR
pushed a commit
to yaacovCR/graphql-js
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 17, 2025
Explanation: `Object.create(null)` returns value of `any` type. So bellow construct is not reported by TS even in "strict" mode: ```ts const foo = Object.create(null); ``` Fixing this issue in `extendSchema` requires adding more code since we can't put all extensions nodes into one collection without loosing typesafety.
yaacovCR
pushed a commit
to yaacovCR/graphql-js
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 22, 2025
Explanation: `Object.create(null)` returns value of `any` type. So bellow construct is not reported by TS even in "strict" mode: ```ts const foo = Object.create(null); ``` Fixing this issue in `extendSchema` requires adding more code since we can't put all extensions nodes into one collection without loosing typesafety.
yaacovCR
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 22, 2025
Explanation: `Object.create(null)` returns value of `any` type. So bellow construct is not reported by TS even in "strict" mode: ```ts const foo = Object.create(null); ``` Fixing this issue in `extendSchema` requires adding more code since we can't put all extensions nodes into one collection without loosing typesafety.
yaacovCR
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 22, 2025
Explanation: `Object.create(null)` returns value of `any` type. So bellow construct is not reported by TS even in "strict" mode: ```ts const foo = Object.create(null); ``` Fixing this issue in `extendSchema` requires adding more code since we can't put all extensions nodes into one collection without loosing typesafety.
yaacovCR
pushed a commit
to yaacovCR/graphql-js
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 27, 2026
Explanation: `Object.create(null)` returns value of `any` type. So bellow construct is not reported by TS even in "strict" mode: ```ts const foo = Object.create(null); ``` Fixing this issue in `extendSchema` requires adding more code since we can't put all extensions nodes into one collection without loosing typesafety.
yaacovCR
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 22, 2026
Explanation: `Object.create(null)` returns value of `any` type. So bellow construct is not reported by TS even in "strict" mode: ```ts const foo = Object.create(null); ``` Fixing this issue in `extendSchema` requires adding more code since we can't put all extensions nodes into one collection without loosing typesafety.
yaacovCR
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 23, 2026
Explanation: `Object.create(null)` returns value of `any` type. So bellow construct is not reported by TS even in "strict" mode: ```ts const foo = Object.create(null); ``` Fixing this issue in `extendSchema` requires adding more code since we can't put all extensions nodes into one collection without loosing typesafety.
yaacovCR
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 24, 2026
Explanation: `Object.create(null)` returns value of `any` type. So bellow construct is not reported by TS even in "strict" mode: ```ts const foo = Object.create(null); ``` Fixing this issue in `extendSchema` requires adding more code since we can't put all extensions nodes into one collection without loosing typesafety.
yaacovCR
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 24, 2026
Explanation: `Object.create(null)` returns value of `any` type. So bellow construct is not reported by TS even in "strict" mode: ```ts const foo = Object.create(null); ``` Fixing this issue in `extendSchema` requires adding more code since we can't put all extensions nodes into one collection without loosing typesafety.
yaacovCR
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 24, 2026
Explanation: `Object.create(null)` returns value of `any` type. So bellow construct is not reported by TS even in "strict" mode: ```ts const foo = Object.create(null); ``` Fixing this issue in `extendSchema` requires adding more code since we can't put all extensions nodes into one collection without loosing typesafety.
yaacovCR
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 24, 2026
Explanation: `Object.create(null)` returns value of `any` type. So bellow construct is not reported by TS even in "strict" mode: ```ts const foo = Object.create(null); ``` Fixing this issue in `extendSchema` requires adding more code since we can't put all extensions nodes into one collection without loosing typesafety.
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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 aims to explain what's going on for #3648 the main issues seem to be:
for..ofin hot pathsIf we find this to be sufficient we can find a way to add a build step or merge as-is with some lint-rules. This currently touches the following issues in hot-paths only.
There are more issues to be found. Other slowdowns could be due to raw ES6 classes, ....
EDIT: verifies yes, ES5 classes are a lot faster like these but imho it's not worth writing that as opposed to the little change of avoiding
for..ofin hot paths 😅I have a suspicion that the custom extension of Map (AccumulatorMap) is also to blame as it lives on the hot-path
Preliminary results where local is ES5 and the other is this branch. (some benches don't run when I use ES5 in tsconfig)