On Sun, 7 Apr 2024 01:49:01 GMT, Dean Long wrote:
>> Scott Gibbons has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Oops
>
> I went ahead and tried a pure-Java implementation, and it is faster for small
> sizes (up to 8) and only about
On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 02:16:57 GMT, Scott Gibbons wrote:
>> Re-write the IndexOf code without the use of the pcmpestri instruction, only
>> using AVX2 instructions. This change accelerates String.IndexOf on average
>> 1.3x for AVX2. The benchmark numbers:
>>
>>
>> Benchmark
On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 02:16:57 GMT, Scott Gibbons wrote:
>> Re-write the IndexOf code without the use of the pcmpestri instruction, only
>> using AVX2 instructions. This change accelerates String.IndexOf on average
>> 1.3x for AVX2. The benchmark numbers:
>>
>>
>> Benchmark
On Sun, 17 Sep 2023 16:01:33 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
> @cl4es made performance optimizations for the simple specifiers of
> String.format in PR https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/2830. Based on the
> same idea, I continued to make improvements. I made patterns like %2d %02d
> also be
On Wed, 27 Sep 2023 09:35:47 GMT, 温绍锦 wrote:
>> @cl4es made performance optimizations for the simple specifiers of
>> String.format in PR https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/2830. Based on the
>> same idea, I continued to make improvements. I made patterns like %2d %02d
>> also be optimized.
On Tue, 30 May 2023 09:32:02 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
>> @forax
>>
>> Hi! Sorry for this sudden message, but this one captured my attention
>>
>>> and subtype checks are usually fast.
>>
>> And I hope this PR to be the right place to raise this.
>>
>> I was looking this PR to better
On Tue, 2 May 2023 13:57:37 GMT, Rémi Forax wrote:
>> Jan Lahoda has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains four additional
>> commits
On Wed, 15 Mar 2023 14:56:28 GMT, Eirik Bjorsnos wrote:
>> Eirik Bjorsnos has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Update StringLatin1.canEncode to sync with same test in CharacterData.of
>
> Just for fun, I tried with a
On Wed, 15 Mar 2023 13:42:22 GMT, Eirik Bjorsnos wrote:
>> Can you check what happen adding much more inputs to the dataset including
>> non-latin chars as well and use `-prof perfnorm` to check what `perf` report
>> re branches/branch-misses?
>>
>> You can use `SplittableRandom` to
On Wed, 15 Mar 2023 12:28:05 GMT, Eirik Bjorsnos wrote:
>>> `if (ch && 0xFF00 == 0) {`
>>
>> This seems to perform similar to baseline:
>>
>>
>> Benchmark (codePoint) Mode Cnt Score Error Units
>> Characters.isDigit 48 avgt 15 0.890 ± 0.025 ns/op
>>
On Wed, 8 Feb 2023 00:07:14 GMT, Claes Redestad wrote:
>> This patch adds special-cases to `Arrays.copyOf` and `Arrays.copyOfRange` to
>> clone arrays when `newLength` or range inputs span the input array. This
>> helps eliminate range checks and has been verified to help various String
>>
On Tue, 7 Feb 2023 22:43:15 GMT, Claes Redestad wrote:
>> This adds a local, specialized `copyBytes` method to `String` that avoids
>> certain redundant range checks and clamping that JIT has issues removing
>> fully.
>>
>> This has a small but statistically significant effect on `String`
>>
On Tue, 7 Feb 2023 20:32:11 GMT, Claes Redestad wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/String.java line 698:
>>
>>> 696: }
>>> 697:
>>> 698: static byte[] copyBytes(byte[] bytes, int offset, int length) {
>>
>> Given that the stub generated for array copy seems highly
On Tue, 7 Feb 2023 15:25:05 GMT, Claes Redestad wrote:
>> This adds a local, specialized `copyBytes` method to `String` that avoids
>> certain redundant range checks and clamping that JIT has issues removing
>> fully.
>>
>> This has a small but statistically significant effect on `String`
>>
14 matches
Mail list logo
