FAQ

On 2013/03/03 19:56:24, osaingre wrote:
On 2013/03/02 02:01:59, dfc wrote:
On 2013/03/01 01:56:47, osaingre wrote:
Hello mailto:golang-dev@googlegroups.com (cc:
mailto:golang-dev@googlegroups.com),
I'd like you to review this change to
https://code.google.com/p/go

Thank you for this proposal. Can you provide any benchmark details
to assert
the
cost of this additional checking ?
BenchmarkMarshal marshals a single struct to XML. It runs 7% slower after the
patch.
Before:
BenchmarkMarshal 100000 26231 ns/op
After:
BenchmarkMarshal 100000 28058 ns/op
Ping :-)

https://codereview.appspot.com/7438051/

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Search Discussions

  • R at Mar 8, 2013 at 9:03 pm
    This is an inefficient implementation. It adds another scan over the
    data, plus some allocation through bytes.Map. It's possible to do this
    much more efficiently.

    I suggest starting over with an implementation that incorporates the
    error check into the escape processing loop that's already there.

    That said, there's no rush. I doubt this will make it into Go 1.1.

    https://codereview.appspot.com/7438051/

    --

    ---
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-dev" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
  • Osaingre at Mar 8, 2013 at 10:03 pm

    On 2013/03/08 21:03:34, r wrote:
    This is an inefficient implementation. It adds another scan over the
    data, plus
    some allocation through bytes.Map. It's possible to do this much more
    efficiently.
    I suggest starting over with an implementation that incorporates the
    error check
    into the escape processing loop that's already there.
    That said, there's no rush. I doubt this will make it into Go 1.1.
    Ok thanks, I'll look into it.


    https://codereview.appspot.com/7438051/

    --

    ---
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-dev" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupgolang-dev @
categoriesgo
postedMar 8, '13 at 10:07a
activeMar 8, '13 at 10:03p
posts3
users2
websitegolang.org

2 users in discussion

Osaingre: 2 posts R: 1 post

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase