use yoke crate to erase lifetime of unstructured #4
Conversation
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
A little proof of concept, using
yoketo carry anUnstructuredalong with the underlying, owned data to erase the lifetime onUnstructured.The downside seems to me that the code is slightly more complex. It took me a moment to figure out how to use
Yoke::map_project. It may be the case that I'm just not usingyokecorrectly.The advantage I'm seeing is that this avoids copying the data back and forth between two vectors. This may be significant if a lot of data is received from the fuzzer and every control plane method copies most of that once.
Another thing to consider is the additional dependency, which cranelift tries to avoid.