Add fast mb_strcut implementation for UTF-16 #12524
Closed
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
Similar to the fast, specialized mb_strcut implementation for UTF-8 in 1f0cf13, this new implementation of mb_strcut for UTF-16 strings just examines a few bytes before each cut point. Even for short strings, the new implementation is around 2x faster. For strings around 10,000 bytes in length, it comes out about 100-500x faster in my microbenchmarks. The new implementation behaves identically to the old one on valid UTF-16 strings; a fuzzer was used to help verify this.
Girgias
reviewed
Oct 26, 2023
Girgias
approved these changes
Oct 28, 2023
|
Landed on master. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Similar to the fast, specialized mb_strcut implementation for UTF-8 in 1f0cf13, this new implementation of mb_strcut for UTF-16 strings just examines a few bytes before each cut point.
Even for short strings, the new implementation is around 2x faster. For strings around 10,000 bytes in length, it comes out about 100-500x faster in my microbenchmarks.
The new implementation behaves identically to the old one on valid UTF-16 strings; a fuzzer was used to help verify this.
@Girgias @cmb69 @youkidearitai @kamil-tekiela @iluuu1994