-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16
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
Bench math::nq
#13
Comments
In my experience, for example, the compiler isn't always smart enough to elide the bound checks for indexing where all indexing operations are garanteed to be in-bound within a function, and using |
Do we know if anyone is actually using |
Trading performance for some well-reviewed For example, bounds checks on slices can often be removed by using iteration instead. Or by doing a check once at the start of a local scope then relying on llvm deducing that all indices are smaller than the initial check. When in doubt, the secure code working group or |
We can't say that it is not used at all. That said, the code was at some point extracted as a separate crate: |
Which was transferred to |
Then, how about unifying the implementations in |
That seems useful, yeah. There probably needs to be one pass ensuring that the implementation hasn't diverged but I see you're already busy merging them 🙂 |
My inclination would be to deprecate the |
The complex but stable (API unlikely to change) algorithms in
math::nq
seems to be good subjects of benchmarking. Benchmarks will help those who want to improve their performance.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: