refactor(semantic): remove AstNodes program field#12516
Merged
graphite-app[bot] merged 1 commit intomainfrom Jul 25, 2025
Merged
refactor(semantic): remove AstNodes program field#12516graphite-app[bot] merged 1 commit intomainfrom
AstNodes program field#12516graphite-app[bot] merged 1 commit intomainfrom
Conversation
github-actions
bot
added
A-semantic
Member
Author
How to use the Graphite Merge QueueAdd either label to this PR to merge it via the merge queue:
You must have a Graphite account in order to use the merge queue. Sign up using this link. An organization admin has enabled the Graphite Merge Queue in this repository. Please do not merge from GitHub as this will restart CI on PRs being processed by the merge queue. This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking. |
CodSpeed Instrumentation Performance ReportMerging #12516 will not alter performanceComparing Summary
Footnotes |
graphite-app
bot
changed the base branch from
07-25-refactor_semantic_astnodes_program_return_program_not_option_program_
to
graphite-base/12516
overlookmotel
force-pushed
the
07-25-refactor_semantic_remove_astnodes_program_field
branch
from
7055ecb to
3edb40e
Compare
overlookmotel
changed the base branch from
graphite-base/12516
to
07-25-refactor_semantic_astnodes_program_return_program_not_option_program_
Base automatically changed from
07-25-refactor_semantic_astnodes_program_return_program_not_option_program_
to
main
July 25, 2025 12:14
Contributor
Merge activity
|
`Program` is always the first node in `AstNodes`, so no need to store a duplicate `&Program` reference in `AstNodes`. I *think* this is an improvement. It does make `AstNodes::program` marginally more expensive, because it now has 2 checks: 1. Check `AstNodes::nodes` is not empty. and 2. Check that first AST node is `Program`. But both checks are branches which are never taken, so pretty cheap, and both checks share a single panic. So overall, I think it's probably better than `AstNodes` being larger than it otherwise needs to be.
graphite-app
bot
force-pushed
the
07-25-refactor_semantic_remove_astnodes_program_field
branch
from
3edb40e to
8912134
Compare
graphite-app
bot
deleted the
07-25-refactor_semantic_remove_astnodes_program_field
branch
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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.
Programis always the first node inAstNodes, so no need to store a duplicate&Programreference inAstNodes.I think this is an improvement. It does make
AstNodes::programmarginally more expensive, because it now has 2 checks:AstNodes::nodesis not empty. andProgram.But both checks are branches which are never taken, so pretty cheap, and both checks share a single panic. So overall, I think it's probably better than
AstNodesbeing larger than it otherwise needs to be.