Skip to content

Use interned strings when possible, for efficiency purposes #14963

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 4, 2025

Conversation

samueltardieu
Copy link
Contributor

Also, a number of unnecessary .as_str() calls have been removed for clarity.

changelog: none

Also, a number of unnecessary `.as_str()` calls have been removed for
clarity.
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jun 3, 2025

r? @llogiq

rustbot has assigned @llogiq.
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 the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties label Jun 3, 2025
@llogiq
Copy link
Contributor

llogiq commented Jun 4, 2025

Wow, I read through the whole thing. Merging this will likely lead to quite some conflicts, but we'll have to tackle that sooner or later anyway.

So I will be the bad guy to merge this. 👹

@llogiq llogiq added this pull request to the merge queue Jun 4, 2025
Merged via the queue into rust-lang:master with commit 84ef7fb Jun 4, 2025
11 checks passed
@samueltardieu samueltardieu deleted the more-strings-interning branch June 4, 2025 07:48
@samueltardieu
Copy link
Contributor Author

@llogiq The changes are all quite localized, I don't expect many conflicts with existing PRs even though the PR touches several files. For example, none of my pending PRs seem to have been affected.

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
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants