Specialize `StepBy<Range<{integer}>>`
OLD
iter::bench_range_step_by_fold_u16 700.00ns/iter +/- 10.00ns
iter::bench_range_step_by_fold_usize 519.00ns/iter +/- 6.00ns
iter::bench_range_step_by_loop_u32 555.00ns/iter +/- 7.00ns
iter::bench_range_step_by_sum_reducible 37.00ns/iter +/- 0.00ns
NEW
iter::bench_range_step_by_fold_u16 49.00ns/iter +/- 0.00ns
iter::bench_range_step_by_fold_usize 194.00ns/iter +/- 1.00ns
iter::bench_range_step_by_loop_u32 98.00ns/iter +/- 0.00ns
iter::bench_range_step_by_sum_reducible 1.00ns/iter +/- 0.00ns
NEW + `-Ctarget-cpu=x86-64-v3`
iter::bench_range_step_by_fold_u16 22.00ns/iter +/- 0.00ns
iter::bench_range_step_by_fold_usize 80.00ns/iter +/- 1.00ns
iter::bench_range_step_by_loop_u32 41.00ns/iter +/- 0.00ns
iter::bench_range_step_by_sum_reducible 1.00ns/iter +/- 0.00ns
I have only optimized for walltime of those methods, I haven't tested whether it eliminates bounds checks when indexing into slices via things like `(0..slice.len()).step_by(16)`.
|
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| alloc | ||
| backtrace@4245978ca8 | ||
| core | ||
| panic_abort | ||
| panic_unwind | ||
| portable-simd | ||
| proc_macro | ||
| profiler_builtins | ||
| rtstartup | ||
| rustc-std-workspace-alloc | ||
| rustc-std-workspace-core | ||
| rustc-std-workspace-std | ||
| std | ||
| stdarch@d77878b729 | ||
| sysroot | ||
| test | ||
| unwind | ||