FWIW, if you agree that this approach is reasonable, I would be willing
to write the patch for it.
-Kevin Ballard
On Tue, Aug 2, 2016, at 05:46 PM, Kevin Ballard wrote:
> I agree with Stephan, NSIndexPath performance is important and we
> should avoid the overhead of allocating/freeing an array for the
> common case. Instead of just always wrapping NSIndexPath, maybe we
> should just switch the internal representation to something like
>
> enum Indices {
> case one(Int)
> case two(Int, Int)
> // case three?
> case many([Int])
> }
>
> Yeah it complicates the methods a bit, and we'd have to have a custom
> index instead of just using Array's index, but it avoids heap
> allocation for the extremely common case of a 2-element index path
> (it's so common, I don't think I've *ever* seen an NSIndexPath that
> didn't contain exactly 2 indices).
>
> -Kevin Ballard
>
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2016, at 04:24 AM, Stephan Tolksdorf via swift-corelibs-
> dev wrote:
>> Tony,
>>
>> I understand why you'd ideally want to have a real-world benchmark to
>> guide performance optimisations, but if you require that for every
>> performance-related change, you set a very high bar, and that bar
>> will probably have the effect of biasing performance downwards, since
>> if there is no existing benchmark, changes that worsen performance
>> might not get flagged.
>>
>> The fact that NSIndexPath got the tagged pointer treatment probably
>> indicates that its implementation has a non-negligible effect on
>> performance (see also
>> https://twitter.com/Catfish_Man/status/393249511075639296).
>>
>> The current IndexPath implementation in terms of an Int array clearly
>> introduces unnecessary overhead in ObjC interop scenarios, so unless
>> this implementation of IndexPath has some benefit I don't understand,
>> I'd argue that it should be replaced with a straightforward wrapper
>> around an NSIndexPath value.
>>
>> - Stephan
>>
>> On 2 August 2016 at 12:12, Tony Parker
>> <anthony.par...@apple.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Stephan,
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Aug 2, 2016, at 6:04 PM, Stephan Tolksdorf <s...@quanttec.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Parker,
>>>>
>>>> I noticed the IndexPath overhead when I investigated why a Swift 3
>>>> implementation of
>>>> UICollectionViewLayout.layoutAttributesForElementsInRect spent more
>>>> time in malloc, free and related methods, but I don't have a
>>>> benchmark.
>>>>
>>>> Is it important that IndexPath uses native Swift refcounting? It
>>>> seems to me that this type is mainly used in ObjC interop code. In
>>>> native Swift code I would always try to avoid using a dynamically
>>>> sized, heap allocated array as a data structure index. If
>>>> NSIndexPath can't be bridged to a native Swift type without
>>>> introducing additional overhead, then maybe it shouldn't be bridged
>>>> at all?
>>>>
>>>> - Stephan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I do think it is likely we could figure out some improvements here,
>>> but I’d like to start with a concrete test (and something that is
>>> representative of real world use cases). If it’s possible to extract
>>> something out of what you’ve already done, that would be really
>>> helpful. We can also file a bug on bugs.swift.org as a call for help
>>> designing a better perf test suite (we need this for all of the
>>> types, frankly).
>>>
>>> Once we know we’re measuring the right thing, there are all kinds of
>>> interesting things we can do. If (when?) we have ABI stability in
>>> Swift 4, we may be able to also change the ObjC Foundation.framework
>>> to better cooperate with the Swift side, as we’ll be able to tie the
>>> current overlay code to a specific OS instead of having to run back
>>> several releases.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> - Tony
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2 August 2016 at 11:09, Tony Parker <anthony.par...@apple.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Stephan,
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you have some benchmarks that you could share? That would help
>>>>> us focus performance work in the right area.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know that 2-item IndexPaths are super common with UIKit
>>>>> collection view and friends, so we may just want to special case
>>>>> those. Unfortunately, NSIndexPath is not abstract, so subclassing
>>>>> it in the same way that we do for a few of the other bridged
>>>>> types (to use native Swift refcounting) is not easy. On the other
>>>>> hand, the ObjC implementation does use tagged pointers, so some
>>>>> NSIndexPaths are really cheap to create.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Tony
>>>>>
>>>>> > On Aug 1, 2016, at 11:44 PM, Stephan Tolksdorf via swift-corelibs-
>>>>> > dev <swift-corelibs-dev@swift.org> wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Hi,
>>>>> >
>>>>> > IndexPath is currently implemented using an [Int] array that is
>>>>> > bridged to an NSIndexPath only on demand. Since IndexPath
>>>>> > values are primarily used together with Objective-C APIs,
>>>>> > wouldn't it be better to implement IndexPath directly as an
>>>>> > NSIndexPath wrapper, in order to avoid the overhead of
>>>>> > temporary array instances?
>>>>> >
>>>>> > - Stephan
>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>> > swift-corelibs-dev mailing list swift-corelibs-dev@swift.org
>>>>> > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-corelibs-dev
>>>>
>>>
>> _________________________________________________
>> swift-corelibs-dev mailing list
>> swift-corelibs-dev@swift.org
>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-corelibs-dev
>
_______________________________________________
swift-corelibs-dev mailing list
swift-corelibs-dev@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-corelibs-dev
