Use if/elsif instead of ||= with guard clause #3975
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
7fbccb6 to
226a1bd
Compare
The previous version needlessly required that all guard clauses run even when a prior line had matched and initialized mf_title. Switching to explicit if/elsif allows for early breaking. This switch helps speed up the view page of an item with hundreds of sections by avoiding the third case of file_location which turns out to be expensive.
phuongdh
approved these changes
Feb 13, 2020
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The previous version needlessly required that all guard clauses run even when a
prior line had matched and initialized mf_title. Switching to explicit
if/elsif allows for early breaking. This switch helps speed up the view
page of an item with hundreds of sections by avoiding the third case of
file_location which turns out to be expensive (~0.25s).
Making this change resulted in
gather_all_commentsfor this item running under 2s as opposed to 360s before the change.