@@ -96,21 +96,19 @@ If you are a Rust project owner and are looking for contributors, please submit
96
96
97
97
## Rust Compiler Performance Triage
98
98
99
- * [ 2020-09-21 ] ( https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc-perf/blob/master/triage/2020-09-21 .md ) :
100
- 2 Regressions, 5 Improvements, 4 Mixed
99
+ * [ 2020-09-28 ] ( https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc-perf/blob/master/triage/2020-09-28 .md ) :
100
+ 0 Regressions, 1 Improvements, 3 Mixed
101
101
102
- This was the first week of semi-automated perf triage, and thank goodness:
103
- There was a lot going on. Most regressions are either quite small or already
104
- have a fix published.
105
102
106
- [ #72412 ] ( https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/72412 ) is probably the most
107
- interesting case. It fixes a pathological problem involving nested closures by
108
- adding cycle detection to what seems to be a relatively hot part of the code.
109
- As a result, most users will see a slight [ compile-time
110
- regression] ( https://perf.rust-lang.org/compare.html?start=2c69266c0697b0c0b34abea62cba1a1d3c59c90c&end=fdc3405c20122fd0f077f5a77addabc873f20e4c&stat=task-clock )
111
- for their crates.
103
+ Most significant changes this week came in response to regressions discussed in
104
+ last week's triage report. Curious readers may be interested in
105
+ [ #77058 ] ( https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/77058 ) , in which the removal
106
+ of a single field from a struct caused a 25% decrease in wall-times for one
107
+ seemingly unrelated benchmark, or
108
+ [ #76986 ] ( https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/76986 ) , an ABI change that
109
+ should be a pretty clear win but seems to have mixed results.
112
110
113
- See the [ full report] ( https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc-perf/blob/master/triage/2020-09-21 .md ) for more.
111
+ See the [ full report] ( https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc-perf/blob/master/triage/2020-09-28 .md ) for more.
114
112
115
113
## Approved RFCs
116
114
0 commit comments