Open knst opened 3 months ago
I just see that std::greater<>
and std::less<>
are used, but <functional>
is not included for them. Maybe this can be fixed, too?
hi! Is there any chances too see a progress here? Can it get merged to the main?
it seems useful changes in my opinion.
@knst There appears to be a problem running checks on this PR. Can you push a dummy change as shown below to retrigger the tests.
commit -m "retrigger checks" --allow-empty
@d-winsor
3 workflows awaiting approval
problem running checks on this PR
I force pushed a branch, seems as I need approval again
@knst There appears to be a problem running checks on this PR. Can you push a dummy change as shown below to retrigger the tests.
commit -m "retrigger checks" --allow-empty
Hi @d-winsor, it appears the CI is still not triggering? Please advise.
Thanks!
Hey all,
this has been approved for a while? CI failures seem unrelated? Please advise, it'd be nice to get some movement again
forward
is already declared in utility, no need to include<algorithm>
which is relatively heavyhash
is already declared in memory, no need to bring brand-new header<system_error>
for hash only.On my machine with my customized fork of GSL it improves a compilation time of gsl/pointers drastically.
See benchmark (best time over 5 runs):
baseline
removed algorithm:
without algorithm and system_error:
Considering using
gsl/pointers
all over codebase it speeds up compilation time of any project that uses gsl/pointers.