You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Rollup merge of #103446 - the8472:tra-array-chunks, r=Mark-Simulacrum
Specialize `iter::ArrayChunks::fold` for TrustedRandomAccess iterators
```
OLD:
test iter::bench_trusted_random_access_chunks ... bench: 368 ns/iter (+/- 4)
NEW:
test iter::bench_trusted_random_access_chunks ... bench: 30 ns/iter (+/- 0)
```
The resulting assembly is similar to #103166 but the specialization kicks in under different (partially overlapping) conditions compared to that PR. They're complementary.
In principle a TRA-based specialization could be applied to all `ArrayChunks` methods, including `next()` as we do for `Zip` but that would have all the same hazards as the Zip specialization. Only doing it for `fold` is far less hazardous. The downside is that it only helps with internal, exhaustive iteration. I.e. `for _ in` or `try_fold` will not benefit.
Note that the regular, `try_fold`-based and the specialized `fold()` impl have observably slightly different behavior. Namely the specialized variant does not fetch the remainder elements from the underlying iterator. We do have a few other places in the standard library where beyond-the-end-of-iteration side-effects are being elided under some circumstances but not others.
Inspired by https://old.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/yaft60/zerocost_iterator_abstractionsnot_so_zerocost/
0 commit comments