-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.3k
Merge glb
and lub
modules
#131191
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
Merge glb
and lub
modules
#131191
Conversation
changes to the core type system |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
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.
this change itself is positive, even if my medium-term goal is to remove these relations entirely.
3d3ed33
to
81f458e
Compare
I have addressed the comments and fixed the rustdoc error. Thanks! |
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.
r=me after nits
Most of the code in these two modules is duplicated in the other module. This commit eliminates the duplication by replacing them with a new module `lattice_op`. The new `LatticeOpKind` enum is used to distinguish between glb and lub in the few places where the behaviour differs.
It's no longer necessary now that the `glb` and `lub` modules have been merged.
81f458e
to
ee227de
Compare
I addressed the latest comments. @bors r=lcnr |
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
Finished benchmarking commit (7067e4a): comparison URL. Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed@rustbot label: -perf-regression Instruction countThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Max RSS (memory usage)Results (secondary 0.1%)This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
CyclesResults (secondary 2.5%)This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 774.169s -> 772.19s (-0.26%) |
Tons of code is duplicated across them, and it's easy to factor that out.
r? @lcnr