: is_function simplification by ArtemSarmini · Pull Request #460 · microsoft/STL (original) (raw)

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 andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account

Conversation46 Commits15 Checks0 Files changed

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

[ Show hidden characters]({{ revealButtonHref }})

@ArtemSarmini

Description

Closes #198. Implementation relies on is_reference and is_const, so is_function was moved down right after is_volatile (I didn't want to separate is_const and is_volatile).

Checklist

Be sure you've read README.md and understand the scope of this repo.

If you're unsure about a box, leave it unchecked. A maintainer will help you.

@ArtemSarmini

@ArtemSarmini

@ArtemSarmini

CaseyCarter

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Did you intend to update the llvm-project submodule reference? (I suspect not.)

@ArtemSarmini

@ArtemSarmini

ArtemSarmini

@ArtemSarmini

I didn't, so llvm is reverted to original commit

@ArtemSarmini

@ArtemSarmini

Last commit added same optimization to is_member_function_pointer and is_member_object_pointer. I had to move stuff around the file a lot, which is bad, as I heard we tend to have the same declaration order as standard. Maybe _Implementation_details should be defined first in another header like xtraits?

@StephanTLavavej

I had to move stuff around the file a lot, which is bad, as I heard we tend to have the same declaration order as standard.

I would say that the general rule is “follow the Standard’s order unless there’s a reason to do otherwise”. Type traits extensively use one another, so their order often varies from what’s depicted in the Standard, and that’s fine.

CaseyCarter

@ArtemSarmini

@ArtemSarmini

is_object_v uses is_function_v, so it was moved down.

@BillyONeal

Given that this is being billed as a throughput improvement can we get some form of benchmark demonstrating that this change is worth it?

@ArtemSarmini

@CaseyCarter

CaseyCarter

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've pushed a commit with a couple of formatting changes that were easier to make than comment. This otherwise seems ready to me.

@StephanTLavavej

Regarding benchmarking, the undocumented compiler option /d1templateStats may provide sufficient evidence. Here's an example:

C:\Temp>type meow.cpp
#include <algorithm>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <vector>
using namespace std;

int main() {
    vector<int> v{1, 7, 2, 9};
    sort(v.begin(), v.end());
    for (const auto& e : v) {
        printf("%d, ", e);
    }
    printf("\n");
}

C:\Temp>cl /EHsc /nologo /W4 /MT /d1templateStats meow.cpp
meow.cpp
Total templates                              : 371

Class templates                              : 255
Class template specializations               : 56
Class template partial specializations       : 200
Class template explicit specializations      : 55
Class template tentative specializations     : 573
Total class template specializations         : 884

Most class template specializations          : "__vcrt_va_list_is_reference" (5)
Most class template partial specializations  : "std::_Is_function" (36)
Most class template explicit specializations : "std::numeric_limits" (18)
Most class template tentative specializations: "std::integral_constant" (49)

Function templates                           : 49
Function template specializations            : 61
Function template explicit specializations   : 1
Total function template specializations      : 62

Most function specializations                : "std::declval" (6)
Most function explicit specializations       : "std::_Convert_size" (1)

Alias templates                              : 43
Alias template specializations               : 242

Most alias template specializations          : "std::void_t" (43)

Variable templates                           : 24
Variable template specializations            : 49
Variable template partial specializations    : 4
Variable template explicit specializations   : 0
Variable template tentative specializations  : 0

Most variable template specializations       : "std::is_same_v" (9)

Reparsed function template specializations   : 61
Substituted function template specializations   : 0

@StephanTLavavej

/d1reportTimeSummary can also be used to benchmark this change.

barcharcraz

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks fine to me, I did add comments about some comments (please feel free to comment about my comment comments), but given that they were probably per-existing, and also given that I don't actually care that much about them it's fine if you choose to ignore my suggestions.

@ArtemSarmini

removed pointless comments, provided better _Arg_types description

@barcharcraz

I benched this with clang-cl and cl, As expected I saw very little change on CL.

The testing program:

#include #include <stdio.h> #include

using namespace std;

int main() { vector v {1,7,2,9}; sort(begin(v), end(v)); }

msvc before total: 0.110538s
msvc after total: 0.110835s

no change.

However with clang-cl I saw more change
clang-cl before: 451.931 ms
clang-cl after: 187.441 ms

I didn't rebase on master before testing the "after" changes, and I turned off warnings on the stl build (the compile options on the test program were identical.

@BillyONeal

BillyONeal

@CaseyCarter

@CaseyCarter

Drive-by: Make _Weak_types an alias template.

CaseyCarter

StephanTLavavej

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There are several test failures, e.g.

"C:\agent\_work\1\s\tests\std\tests\Dev11_0535636_functional_overhaul\test.cpp",
line 1219: error: static assertion failed with "TestRWTypes<Pmf0, float, X*, None, None>::value"
STATIC_ASSERT(TestRWTypes<Pmf0, float, X*, None, None>::value);

@CaseyCarter

@CaseyCarter

@StephanTLavavej

@BillyONeal is concerned that the benchmark might not have been exercising is_function at all, and that executable startup times may have been producing misleading results. (sort doesn't; it just invokes whatever function object it's been given.)

StephanTLavavej

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks! I apologize for my extreme delay in reviewing. I've looked through everything and it appears to be correct and simple, which is great. I noticed that the simplification could be extended to is_object_v; I'll validate this and then push a change.

@StephanTLavavej

@StephanTLavavej

StephanTLavavej

CaseyCarter

@StephanTLavavej

Thanks again for this simplification and compiler throughput improvement, and congratulations on your first microsoft/STL commit! This will ship in VS 2019 16.8 Preview 3. 🎉 😸

Labels