Skip to content
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

Convert LazyTypeObject to use the Bound API #3855

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 18, 2024

Conversation

LilyFoote
Copy link
Contributor

I found this during #3853.

Copy link
Member

@davidhewitt davidhewitt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ah, good catch! Some quick thoughts and I wonder if this will benefit from #3705 being merged, which I'll go rebase now.

@LilyFoote LilyFoote force-pushed the lazy-type-object-get-or-init-bound branch from 13b5d96 to 32cf969 Compare February 17, 2024 22:41
@davidhewitt davidhewitt added the CI-skip-changelog Skip checking changelog entry label Feb 17, 2024
Copy link

codspeed-hq bot commented Feb 17, 2024

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #3855 will improve performances by 10.2%

Comparing LilyFoote:lazy-type-object-get-or-init-bound (3ed9290) with main (f04ad56)

🎉 Hooray! pytest-codspeed just leveled up to 2.2.0!

A heads-up, this is a breaking change and it might affect your current performance baseline a bit. But here's the exciting part - it's packed with new, cool features and promises improved result stability 🥳!
Curious about what's new? Visit our releases page to delve into all the awesome details about this new version.

Summary

⚡ 1 improvements
✅ 78 untouched benchmarks

Benchmarks breakdown

Benchmark main LilyFoote:lazy-type-object-get-or-init-bound Change
sequence_from_list 300 ns 272.2 ns +10.2%

@LilyFoote LilyFoote force-pushed the lazy-type-object-get-or-init-bound branch from 32cf969 to 3ed9290 Compare February 18, 2024 11:44
@LilyFoote
Copy link
Contributor Author

@davidhewitt I think this is ready to merge.

Copy link
Member

@davidhewitt davidhewitt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, indeed, thanks!

(Sorry, I opened this PR a few times but family then pulled me sideways, even though it was so short 🙈)

@davidhewitt davidhewitt added this pull request to the merge queue Feb 18, 2024
Merged via the queue into PyO3:main with commit b4dc854 Feb 18, 2024
38 of 39 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CI-skip-changelog Skip checking changelog entry
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants