[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#57079: 29.0.50; Performance of seq-uniq is not very good
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#57079: 29.0.50; Performance of seq-uniq is not very good |
Date: |
Tue, 09 Aug 2022 19:47:33 +0300 |
> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se>
> Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2022 09:11:07 -0700
>
> Severity: minor
>
> `seq-uniq' is not very performant compared to `-uniq' (from dash.el) and
> even slower compared to the recently removed `gnus-delete-duplicates':
>
> (benchmark-run 10000 (seq-uniq '(a c b c c a d)))
> => (0.355001481 1 0.2518970439999748)
>
> (benchmark-run 10000 (-uniq '(a c b c c a d)))
> => (0.006599549 0 0.0)
>
> (benchmark-run 10000 (gnus-delete-duplicates '(a c b c c a d)))
> => (0.0034537929999999997 0 0.0)
>
> Could we improve the performance of `seq-uniq' for lists?
What's wrong with using delete-dups for your cases above?
- bug#57079: 29.0.50; Performance of seq-uniq is not very good, Stefan Kangas, 2022/08/09
- bug#57079: 29.0.50; Performance of seq-uniq is not very good,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- bug#57079: 29.0.50; Performance of seq-uniq is not very good, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/08/09
- bug#57079: 29.0.50; Performance of seq-uniq is not very good, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2022/08/09
- bug#57079: 29.0.50; Performance of seq-uniq is not very good, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/08/09
- bug#57079: 29.0.50; Performance of seq-uniq is not very good, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/08/09
- bug#57079: 29.0.50; Performance of seq-uniq is not very good, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2022/08/09
- bug#57079: 29.0.50; Performance of seq-uniq is not very good, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/08/09