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

some optimizations in src/google/protobuf/descriptor.cc #123

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

some optimizations in src/google/protobuf/descriptor.cc #123

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

alex8092
Copy link

@alex8092 alex8092 commented Dec 7, 2014

No description provided.

@googlebot
Copy link

Thanks for your pull request.

It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project, in which case you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA) at https://cla.developers.google.com/.

If you've already signed a CLA, it's possible we don't have your GitHub username or you're using a different email address. Check the information on your CLA or see this help article on setting the email on your git commits.

Once you've done that, please reply here to let us know. If you signed the CLA as a corporation, please let us know the company's name.

@alex8092
Copy link
Author

alex8092 commented Dec 7, 2014

CLA signed

@googlebot
Copy link

CLAs look good, thanks!

@googlebot googlebot added cla: yes and removed cla: no labels Dec 7, 2014
@xfxyjwf
Copy link
Contributor

xfxyjwf commented Dec 8, 2014

@alex8092 , can you give some background about this optimization? When does the original code become a performance problem and how much does this change improve the overall performance in a typical scenario? Judging from the code itself, it seems to me this change is optimizing an unusual code path and the improvement it can make is also neglectable.

@tamird
Copy link
Contributor

tamird commented May 8, 2015

Looks like a nice iterator cleanup. any reason not to merge @xfxyjwf ?

@xfxyjwf
Copy link
Contributor

xfxyjwf commented May 8, 2015

I don't see the point of this cleanup. It doesn't make the code more readable and there is no data showing it can improve performance.

@xfxyjwf xfxyjwf closed this May 8, 2015
TeBoring pushed a commit to TeBoring/protobuf that referenced this pull request Jan 19, 2019
Removed default instance and oneof array from tables.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants