-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 722
docs(allocator/hashmap): add comments to HashMap::from_iter_in
#14329
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
docs(allocator/hashmap): add comments to HashMap::from_iter_in
#14329
Conversation
How to use the Graphite Merge QueueAdd either label to this PR to merge it via the merge queue:
You must have a Graphite account in order to use the merge queue. Sign up using this link. An organization admin has enabled the Graphite Merge Queue in this repository. Please do not merge from GitHub as this will restart CI on PRs being processed by the merge queue. This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking. |
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.
Pull Request Overview
This PR adds comprehensive documentation comments to the HashMap::from_iter_in method in the allocator crate, explaining the implementation decisions and trade-offs made during iterator-based HashMap construction.
Key Changes
- Added detailed comments explaining the use of the iterator's lower size bound for capacity estimation
- Documented the trade-offs between potential reallocation vs over-allocation
- Added comments explaining the strategic placement of
ManuallyDropwrapper
Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.
CodSpeed Instrumentation Performance ReportMerging #14329 will not alter performanceComparing Summary
|
Merge activity
|
) Follow-on after #14211. Add comments reflecting conversation we had on that PR.
8122fcf to
0c14e50
Compare

Follow-on after #14211. Add comments reflecting conversation we had on that PR.