JuliaCollections / JuliaCollections/AbstractTrees.jl

collecting a tree iterator is horribly type unstable, with lots of run time dispatch, even when the element type is provided explicitly

Open
#158 1 comment 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Dominant language
Julia
Stars
243
Forks
67
PR merge metrics
No merged PRs in 30d

Description

using JET, AbstractTrees
struct S
    c::Int
end
function AbstractTrees.children(s::S)
    c = s.c
    Iterators.map(Returns(S(c - 1)), Base.OneTo(c))
end
it = Leaves(S(3))
@report_opt collect(S, it)  # ═════ 15 possible errors found ═════
it = PreOrderDFS(S(3))
@report_opt collect(S, it)  # ═════ 9 possible errors found ═════
it = PostOrderDFS(S(3))
@report_opt collect(S, it)  # ═════ 16 possible errors found ═════

For comparison, Base.Generator collects fine without run time dispatch:

using JET
struct S
    c::Int
end
it = Iterators.map(S, 1:5)
@report_opt collect(S, it)

Contributor guide

No contributing guide indexed for this repository

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Start by running the JET examples for collect(S, it) with Leaves, PreOrderDFS, and PostOrderDFS, then compare their reports with the Iterators.map example. Trace the iterator implementations behind those three entry points and determine what keeps explicit element-type collection type unstable. Done means the reported runtime dispatch is addressed for the shown cases.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
julia
Domain
performance
Issue type
Bug
Difficulty
4/5
Estimated time
3-5 days
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Mostly clear
Newbie friendliness
35/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.