lib: add TypedArray to the primordials #32127
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
nodejs-github-bot
added
buffer
|
For some reason this seems to have some regressions at least in the buffer-fill benchmarks here: |
targos
added
blocked
|
Let's revisit after V8 8.0+ lands on master. The overhead should be fixed |
Is it currently possible to at least run these specific benchmarks with V8 8.x to verify the issues are resolved there? |
|
you can try with this canary build (V8 8.1): https://nodejs.org/download/v8-canary/v14.0.0-v8-canary20200121fda488ae67/ |
|
canary-base vs. canary-base + this change: |
This also makes it possible to use Symbol methods and getters.
targos
force-pushed
the
primordial-typed-array
branch
from
0a11233
to
95b07ea
Compare
|
New results: |
|
/cc @nodejs/v8 If I understood https://v8.dev/blog/v8-release-80#optimizing-higher-order-builtins correctly, this change shouldn't affect performance anymore. But we still see a significant difference between these two cases: // 1
const TypedArrayPrototype = Object.getPrototypeOf(Uint8Array.prototype);
const TypedArrayFill = TypedArrayPrototype.fill;
TypedArrayFill.call(buffer, value);
// 2
const ReflectApply = Reflect.apply;
function uncurryThis(func) {
return (thisArg, ...args) => ReflectApply(func, thisArg, args);
}
const TypedArrayPrototypeFill = uncurryThis(TypedArrayFill);
TypedArrayPrototypeFill(buffer, value); |
|
What version of V8 are the newest results based on? |
|
The one we have on master, 8.3. |
ExE-Boss
reviewed
May 17, 2020
Comment on lines
+75
to
+83
| const desc = Reflect.getOwnPropertyDescriptor(src, key); | ||
| if (typeof desc.value === 'function') { | ||
| desc.value = uncurryThis(desc.value); | ||
| } else if (typeof desc.get === 'function') { | ||
| desc.value = uncurryThis(desc.get); | ||
| delete desc.get; | ||
| delete desc.set; | ||
| } | ||
| Reflect.defineProperty(dest, newKey, desc); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should probably also save the setter if it exists.
Suggested change
| const desc = Reflect.getOwnPropertyDescriptor(src, key); | |
| if (typeof desc.value === 'function') { | |
| desc.value = uncurryThis(desc.value); | |
| } else if (typeof desc.get === 'function') { | |
| desc.value = uncurryThis(desc.get); | |
| delete desc.get; | |
| delete desc.set; | |
| } | |
| Reflect.defineProperty(dest, newKey, desc); | |
| const desc = Reflect.getOwnPropertyDescriptor(src, key); | |
| let setterDesc; | |
| if (typeof desc.value === 'function') { | |
| desc.value = uncurryThis(desc.value); | |
| } else if (typeof desc.get === 'function') { | |
| desc.value = uncurryThis(desc.get); | |
| if (typeof desc.set === 'function') { | |
| setterDesc = { value: uncurryThis(desc.set), enumerable: desc.enumerable }; | |
| } | |
| delete desc.get; | |
| delete desc.set; | |
| } | |
| Reflect.defineProperty(dest, newKey, desc); | |
| if (setterDesc) { | |
| Reflect.defineProperty(dest, `${newKey}Setter`, desc); | |
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I’ve extracted this change into #36329.
BridgeAR
force-pushed
the
master
branch
2 times, most recently
from
8ae28ff
to
2935f72
Compare
|
Related to #36016. |
|
This needs a rebase. |
|
This issue/PR was marked as stalled, it will be automatically closed in 30 days. If it should remain open, please leave a comment explaining why it should remain open. |
2 tasks
3 tasks
ExE-Boss
added a commit
to ExE-Boss/node
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 5, 2020
jasnell
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 7, 2020
Closes: #32127 PR-URL: #36329 Fixes: #32127 Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
danielleadams
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 7, 2020
Closes: #32127 PR-URL: #36329 Fixes: #32127 Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
cjihrig
pushed a commit
to cjihrig/node
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 8, 2020
Closes: nodejs#32127 PR-URL: nodejs#36329 Fixes: nodejs#32127 Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
targos
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 16, 2021
Closes: #32127 PR-URL: #36329 Fixes: #32127 Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
targos
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 11, 2021
Closes: #32127 PR-URL: #36329 Fixes: #32127 Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This also makes it possible to use Symbol methods and getters.
Checklist
make -j4 test(UNIX), orvcbuild test(Windows) passes