Always compute Enumerable#count through enumeration for 1.9+#979
Merged
headius merged 1 commit intojruby:masterfrom Aug 31, 2013
Merged
Always compute Enumerable#count through enumeration for 1.9+#979headius merged 1 commit intojruby:masterfrom
headius merged 1 commit intojruby:masterfrom
Conversation
Starting in 1.9, #count is always computed through enumeration
This was referenced Aug 30, 2013
headius
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 31, 2013
Always compute Enumerable#count through enumeration for 1.9+
Member
|
Thanks! Do you think you'll be able to look into enumerator_with_size logic too? |
Contributor
Author
|
Absolutely. Might be a couple of weeks before I can send it, but it's definitely coming. |
Closed
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Looks like MRI dropped the
#sizeoptimization in#countin 1.9.2. Comparing the 1.8 doc to the 2.0 doc also shows this is the intended behavior (interestingly, the 1.9 doc seems to be out of date)Update to match that behavior (also fixes #922).