Skip to content

Conversation

@rchougule
Copy link
Contributor

@rchougulerchougule commented Jan 2, 2021

Checklist
  • make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
  • commit message follows commit guidelines

@nodejs-github-botnodejs-github-bot added the util Issues and PRs related to the built-in util module. label Jan 2, 2021
@aduh95
Copy link
Contributor

Benchmark CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js%20benchmark/job/benchmark-node-micro-benchmarks/853/ (queued, will 404 until it starts)

Copy link
Member

@TrottTrott left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM if benchmark is OK

aduh95
aduh95 previously requested changes Jan 2, 2021
Copy link
Contributor

@aduh95aduh95 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Unfortunately this change induces some very significant perf regressions.

EDIT: I was looking at the wrong CI, my bad 😅

@aduh95aduh95 dismissed their stale reviewJanuary 2, 2021 17:26

Nevemind, I was looking at the wrong CI. Let's wait for the correct CI to complete.

Copy link
Contributor

@aduh95aduh95 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No significant perf regressions, and even a few perf improvements. LGTM!

Details
 confidence improvement accuracy (*) (**) (***) util/inspect-array.js type='denseArray' len=100000 n=500 1.21 % ±5.30% ±7.06% ±9.21% util/inspect-array.js type='denseArray' len=100 n=500 -3.76 % ±4.62% ±6.15% ±8.01% util/inspect-array.js type='denseArray_showHidden' len=100000 n=500 1.87 % ±5.43% ±7.22% ±9.41% util/inspect-array.js type='denseArray_showHidden' len=100 n=500 1.12 % ±4.29% ±5.71% ±7.43% util/inspect-array.js type='mixedArray' len=100000 n=500 0.61 % ±2.76% ±3.67% ±4.78% util/inspect-array.js type='mixedArray' len=100 n=500 0.58 % ±4.16% ±5.54% ±7.21% util/inspect-array.js type='sparseArray' len=100000 n=500 1.38 % ±4.20% ±5.58% ±7.27% util/inspect-array.js type='sparseArray' len=100 n=500 1.50 % ±5.63% ±7.49% ±9.76% util/inspect.js option='colors' method='Array' n=20000 -0.96 % ±1.72% ±2.29% ±2.99% util/inspect.js option='colors' method='Date' n=20000 0.14 % ±4.24% ±5.64% ±7.35% util/inspect.js option='colors' method='Error' n=20000 2.74 % ±3.74% ±4.99% ±6.50% util/inspect.js option='colors' method='Number' n=20000 1.77 % ±3.29% ±4.38% ±5.71% util/inspect.js option='colors' method='Object_deep_ln' n=20000 -1.50 % ±1.82% ±2.42% ±3.16% util/inspect.js option='colors' method='Object_empty' n=20000 *** 5.84 % ±3.33% ±4.45% ±5.84% util/inspect.js option='colors' method='Object' n=20000 0.46 % ±3.17% ±4.22% ±5.49% util/inspect.js option='colors' method='Set' n=20000 2.51 % ±3.74% ±4.98% ±6.48% util/inspect.js option='colors' method='String_boxed' n=20000 -3.43 % ±4.44% ±5.91% ±7.71% util/inspect.js option='colors' method='String_complex' n=20000 0.15 % ±4.01% ±5.34% ±6.95% util/inspect.js option='colors' method='String' n=20000 -1.93 % ±5.51% ±7.33% ±9.54% util/inspect.js option='colors' method='TypedArray_extra' n=20000 * 2.28 % ±2.16% ±2.87% ±3.74% util/inspect.js option='colors' method='TypedArray' n=20000 1.66 % ±1.69% ±2.25% ±2.93% util/inspect.js option='none' method='Array' n=20000 3.05 % ±4.54% ±6.11% ±8.08% util/inspect.js option='none' method='Date' n=20000 1.02 % ±4.16% ±5.53% ±7.20% util/inspect.js option='none' method='Error' n=20000 4.73 % ±5.96% ±7.96% ±10.44% util/inspect.js option='none' method='Number' n=20000 0.62 % ±4.15% ±5.53% ±7.20% util/inspect.js option='none' method='Object_deep_ln' n=20000 0.25 % ±2.72% ±3.63% ±4.73% util/inspect.js option='none' method='Object_empty' n=20000 1.24 % ±3.95% ±5.26% ±6.86% util/inspect.js option='none' method='Object' n=20000 0.25 % ±3.45% ±4.59% ±5.97% util/inspect.js option='none' method='Set' n=20000 -0.86 % ±4.51% ±6.00% ±7.81% util/inspect.js option='none' method='String_boxed' n=20000 1.56 % ±4.30% ±5.72% ±7.44% util/inspect.js option='none' method='String_complex' n=20000 1.17 % ±4.62% ±6.14% ±8.00% util/inspect.js option='none' method='String' n=20000 0.07 % ±4.05% ±5.39% ±7.01% util/inspect.js option='none' method='TypedArray_extra' n=20000 0.59 % ±4.29% ±5.76% ±7.59% util/inspect.js option='none' method='TypedArray' n=20000 4.51 % ±6.35% ±8.52% ±11.25% util/inspect.js option='showHidden' method='Array' n=20000 0.24 % ±1.30% ±1.73% ±2.26% util/inspect.js option='showHidden' method='Date' n=20000 1.20 % ±4.20% ±5.59% ±7.28% util/inspect.js option='showHidden' method='Error' n=20000 1.58 % ±2.57% ±3.42% ±4.46% util/inspect.js option='showHidden' method='Number' n=20000 -3.77 % ±4.89% ±6.55% ±8.61% util/inspect.js option='showHidden' method='Object_deep_ln' n=20000 -1.08 % ±2.20% ±2.93% ±3.81% util/inspect.js option='showHidden' method='Object_empty' n=20000 * 4.50 % ±4.16% ±5.55% ±7.24% util/inspect.js option='showHidden' method='Object' n=20000 2.04 % ±3.66% ±4.87% ±6.35% util/inspect.js option='showHidden' method='Set' n=20000 0.47 % ±4.97% ±6.62% ±8.62% util/inspect.js option='showHidden' method='String_boxed' n=20000 -0.56 % ±4.28% ±5.70% ±7.42% util/inspect.js option='showHidden' method='String_complex' n=20000 0.05 % ±3.15% ±4.19% ±5.45% util/inspect.js option='showHidden' method='String' n=20000 0.53 % ±2.77% ±3.69% ±4.81% util/inspect.js option='showHidden' method='TypedArray_extra' n=20000 1.53 % ±2.53% ±3.37% ±4.39% util/inspect.js option='showHidden' method='TypedArray' n=20000 0.70 % ±1.92% ±2.55% ±3.32% util/inspect-proxy.js isProxy=0 showProxy=0 n=100000 -0.59 % ±1.71% ±2.28% ±2.97% util/inspect-proxy.js isProxy=0 showProxy=1 n=100000 0.10 % ±1.76% ±2.35% ±3.06% util/inspect-proxy.js isProxy=1 showProxy=0 n=100000 1.54 % ±1.87% ±2.49% ±3.24% util/inspect-proxy.js isProxy=1 showProxy=1 n=100000 * 3.59 % ±2.96% ±3.95% ±5.17% Be aware that when doing many comparisons the risk of a false-positive result increases. In this case there are 51 comparisons, you can thus expect the following amount of false-positive results: 2.55 false positives, when considering a 5% risk acceptance (*, **, ***), 0.51 false positives, when considering a 1% risk acceptance (**, ***), 0.05 false positives, when considering a 0.1% risk acceptance (***) 

@aduh95aduh95 added author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. labels Jan 4, 2021
@github-actionsgithub-actionsbot removed the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Jan 4, 2021
@nodejs-github-bot

This comment has been minimized.

@nodejs-github-bot

This comment has been minimized.

@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@aduh95aduh95 added the commit-queue Add this label to land a pull request using GitHub Actions. label Jan 5, 2021
@github-actionsgithub-actionsbot removed the commit-queue Add this label to land a pull request using GitHub Actions. label Jan 5, 2021
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Commit Queue failed
- Loading data for nodejs/node/pull/36730 ✔ Done loading data for nodejs/node/pull/36730 ----------------------------------- PR info ------------------------------------ Title inspect: refactor to use more primodials (#36730) Author Rohan Chougule (@rchougule, first-time contributor) Branch rchougule:inspect_primordials_refactor -> nodejs:master Labels author ready, util Commits 1 - inspect: refactor to use more primodials Committers 1 - Rohan Chougule PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/36730 Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso Reviewed-By: Rich Trott Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel Reviewed-By: Trivikram Kamat Reviewed-By: Pooja D P ------------------------------ Generated metadata ------------------------------ PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/36730 Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso Reviewed-By: Rich Trott Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel Reviewed-By: Trivikram Kamat Reviewed-By: Pooja D P -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ✔ Last GitHub Actions successful ℹ Last Benchmark CI on 2021-01-02T09:09:47Z: https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js%20benchmark/job/benchmark-node-micro-benchmarks/853/ ℹ Last Full PR CI on 2021-01-05T14:08:53Z: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/35296/ - Querying data for job/node-test-pull-request/35296/ ✔ Build data downloaded ✔ Last Jenkins CI successful ℹ This PR was created on Sat, 02 Jan 2021 06:56:23 GMT ✔ Approvals: 5 ✔ - Michaël Zasso (@targos) (TSC): https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/36730#pullrequestreview-560624493 ✔ - Rich Trott (@Trott) (TSC): https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/36730#pullrequestreview-560644682 ✔ - Antoine du Hamel (@aduh95): https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/36730#pullrequestreview-560649622 ✔ - Trivikram Kamat (@trivikr): https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/36730#pullrequestreview-561399102 ✔ - Pooja D P (@PoojaDurgad): https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/36730#pullrequestreview-561686642 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ✔ No git cherry-pick in progress ✔ No git am in progress ✔ No git rebase in progress -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - Bringing origin/master up to date... From https://github.com/nodejs/node * branch master -> FETCH_HEAD ✔ origin/master is now up-to-date - Downloading patch for 36730 From https://github.com/nodejs/node * branch refs/pull/36730/merge -> FETCH_HEAD ✔ Fetched commits as f8b983133824..50c565812fff -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [master fbf6eede8c] inspect: refactor to use more primodials Author: Rohan Chougule Date: Sat Jan 2 12:22:49 2021 +0530 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) ✔ Patches applied -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------- New Message ---------------------------------- inspect: refactor to use more primodials 

PR-URL: #36730
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso [email protected]
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott [email protected]
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel [email protected]
Reviewed-By: Trivikram Kamat [email protected]
Reviewed-By: Pooja D P [email protected]

[master dadecfedb4] inspect: refactor to use more primodials
Author: Rohan Chougule [email protected]
Date: Sat Jan 2 12:22:49 2021 +0530
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
✖ dadecfedb4f821db0b6ca166da699b79f96a2983
✔ 0:0 skipping fixes-url fixes-url
✔ 0:0 blank line after title line-after-title
✔ 0:0 line-lengths are valid line-length
✔ 0:0 metadata is at end of message metadata-end
✔ 1:8 PR-URL is valid. pr-url
✔ 0:0 reviewers are valid reviewers
✖ 0:0 Invalid subsystem: "inspect" subsystem
✔ 0:0 Title is formatted correctly. title-format
✔ 0:0 Title is <= 50 columns. title-length

ℹ Please fix the commit message and try again.

https://github.com/nodejs/node/actions/runs/464070859

@github-actionsgithub-actionsbot added the commit-queue-failed An error occurred while landing this pull request using GitHub Actions. label Jan 5, 2021
PR-URL: nodejs#36730 Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Trivikram Kamat <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Pooja D P <[email protected]>
@aduh95aduh95force-pushed the inspect_primordials_refactor branch from 50c5658 to 779f1bbCompareJanuary 5, 2021 18:49
@aduh95
Copy link
Contributor

Landed in 779f1bb 🎉 Thanks for the contribution!

@aduh95aduh95 merged commit 779f1bb into nodejs:masterJan 5, 2021
@rchougulerchougule deleted the inspect_primordials_refactor branch January 5, 2021 20:33
danielleadams pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 12, 2021
PR-URL: #36730 Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Trivikram Kamat <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Pooja D P <[email protected]>
@danielleadamsdanielleadams mentioned this pull request Jan 12, 2021
@targostargos removed the commit-queue-failed An error occurred while landing this pull request using GitHub Actions. label Sep 5, 2021
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

author readyPRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started.utilIssues and PRs related to the built-in util module.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants

@rchougule@aduh95@nodejs-github-bot@Trott@targos@trivikr@PoojaDurgad