Python: Use only TApiNode in API::Impl#5770
Merged
Merged
Conversation
This ensures that changes to `API::Node` does not invalidate the cached `module Impl`. At present, I don't expect this to have any effect (as the `Node` class is also fairly static, though not explicitly cached), but I can imagine us making some of the `Node` methods have user-extensible behaviour, in which case we definitely do not want this to result in reevaluation of `API::Impl`.
Contributor
Author
|
Not much change in performance: https://github.com/dsp-testing/tausbn-dca/issues/20 |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
This ensures that changes to
API::Nodedo not invalidate the cachedmodule Impl. At present, I don't expect this to have any effect (asthe
Nodeclass is also fairly static, though not explicitly cached),but I can imagine us making some of the
Nodemethods haveuser-extensible behaviour, in which case we definitely do not want this
to result in reevaluation of
API::Impl.Doesn't change behaviour, so no change note needed.