Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

purego: refactor struct_amd64.go #212

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 20, 2024
Merged

purego: refactor struct_amd64.go #212

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 20, 2024
+6 −5

Conversation

hajimehoshi
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

TotallyGamerJet
TotallyGamerJet approved these changes Feb 20, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@TotallyGamerJet TotallyGamerJet left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@hajimehoshi
Copy link
Member Author

So, on second thought, I thought the cost of if branch would not matter compared to other costs we've added. For maintenability, I prefer this flushIfNeeded way. /CC @SealOfTime

@hajimehoshi hajimehoshi merged commit 0789956 into ebitengine:main Feb 20, 2024
20 checks passed
@hajimehoshi hajimehoshi deleted the refactoring branch February 20, 2024 13:46
@SealOfTime
Copy link
Contributor

Flush function is quite likely inlined at a call-site. Either way to reason about performance we'd better do benchmarks. Though I completely agree with maintainability claims regarding flushIfNeeded over just flush

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@TotallyGamerJet TotallyGamerJet TotallyGamerJet approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@hajimehoshi @SealOfTime @TotallyGamerJet