Skip to content

Conversation

pascaldekloe
Copy link
Contributor

@pascaldekloe pascaldekloe commented Aug 27, 2025

No need for fragmented buffers when formatting.

orig.txt: fmt::write_i128_exp                                                  143.39ns/iter      +/- 0.32
orig.txt: fmt::write_i64_exp                                                    68.72ns/iter      +/- 0.03
new.txt:  fmt::write_i128_exp                                                  138.29ns/iter      +/- 0.50
new.txt:  fmt::write_i64_exp                                                    58.93ns/iter      +/- 4.62

This patch fully eliminates unsafe pointer use (after #135265 and #136594).

r? libs

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Aug 27, 2025

r? @ibraheemdev

rustbot has assigned @ibraheemdev.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Aug 27, 2025
@pascaldekloe
Copy link
Contributor Author

https://rust.godbolt.org/z/oe9zr1qd9

Do you want to have another look @tgross35? 🙏 I think we can (and should) format floating points in a single buffer too. If that succeeds then we can drop unstable feature numfmt, package num::fmt. ✨

@tgross35
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for the ping, sure I'm happy to take the formatting followups here

r? tgross35

@rustbot rustbot assigned tgross35 and unassigned ibraheemdev Aug 27, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants