> On May 9, 2016, at 10:28 AM, Jacob Bandes-Storch via swift-users 
> <swift-users@swift.org> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 10:25 AM, Joe Groff via swift-users 
> <swift-users@swift.org <mailto:swift-users@swift.org>> wrote:
> 
> > On May 7, 2016, at 10:39 AM, Austin Zheng via swift-users 
> > <swift-users@swift.org <mailto:swift-users@swift.org>> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Swift users,
> >
> > I wanted to run something past you folks and get some opinions/feedback.
> >
> > About a month ago on Hacker News I saw someone commenting about how Swift's 
> > string-handling code was unbearably slow (3 seconds to run a code sample, 
> > vs. 0.8 in Java). I asked him to provide the code, and he obliged. 
> > Unfortunately, I didn't have time to dig into it until this morning. The 
> > code in its entirety can be found here: 
> > https://gist.github.com/austinzheng/d6c674780a58cb63832c4df3f809e683 
> > <https://gist.github.com/austinzheng/d6c674780a58cb63832c4df3f809e683>
> >
> > At line 26 we have the following code:
> >
> > result.append(begin == eos ? "" : String(cs[begin..<end.successor()]))
> >
> > 'cs' is a UTF16 view into an input string, while 'result' is a [String]. 
> > When I profiled the code in Instruments, I noticed that it was spending 
> > significant time within the reflection machinery.
> >
> > It turns out that the initializer to make a String out of a utf16 view 
> > looks like this, and I believe this is the initializer the author intended 
> > to call:
> >
> > init?(_: String.UTF16View)
> >
> > However, the actual initializer being called was this String initializer in 
> > the Mirror code:
> >
> > public init<Subject>(_ instance: Subject)
> >
> > This seems like a tricky gotcha for developers who aren't extremely 
> > familiar with both the String and reflection APIs. His code looked 
> > reasonable at a first glance and I didn't suspect anything was wrong until 
> > I profiled it. Even so, I only made the connection because I recognized the 
> > name of the standard library function from poking around inside the source 
> > files.
> >
> > What do other people think? Is this something worth worrying about, or is 
> > it so rare that it shouldn't matter? Also, any suggestions as to how that 
> > code sample might be improved would be appreciated - my naive first attempt 
> > wasn't any better.
> 
> This definitely strikes me as a problem. The String<T>(_:) constructor is 
> very easy to call by accident if you're trying to hit another unlabeled 
> initializer. It also strikes me as not particularly "value-preserving", since 
> stringifying many types loses information. Perhaps we should propose giving 
> it a label, String(printing:) maybe?
> 
> +1

+1

 - Daniel

>  
> 
> -Joe
> _______________________________________________
> swift-users mailing list
> swift-users@swift.org <mailto:swift-users@swift.org>
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users 
> <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> swift-users mailing list
> swift-users@swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users

_______________________________________________
swift-users mailing list
swift-users@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users

Reply via email to