Skip to content

Conversation

@treeowl
Copy link
Contributor

@treeowl treeowl commented May 18, 2023

Start work on adding set/map-like functions. Currently, split, splitMaybe, and union.

@treeowl treeowl marked this pull request as draft May 18, 2023 04:33
@treeowl
Copy link
Contributor Author

treeowl commented May 18, 2023

@jaspervdj The biggest question for me is how to benchmark this. I don't understand the benchmark suite of this package; can you give me some guidance?

@treeowl treeowl force-pushed the split-union branch 3 times, most recently from 8ca65dd to 44de944 Compare May 18, 2023 04:50
Start work on adding set/map-like functions. Currently,
`split`, `splitMaybe`, and `union`.
@jaspervdj
Copy link
Owner

@treeowl It's been some years since I looked at that myself! It looks like this is really a benchmark suite to compare different implementations, not really to look for regressions and speedups for the same implementation. That means we can't easily benchmark things like split if they don't have e.g. a HashPSQ implementation. Should we add a new simple benchmark suite? We can probably reuse a bunch of the existing code.

@treeowl
Copy link
Contributor Author

treeowl commented May 18, 2023

That sounds reasonable to me.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants