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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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.
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
Some improvement for import completion #43548
Some improvement for import completion #43548
Changes from 12 commits
127a1de
bbd312b
0db127d
f713449
aa0de62
fad9d46
1e66540
06e9981
6b27a67
6e8bbdd
79e34bf
cdbe5d3
54107a6
f5c0f64
e6172e4
08018a8
cf5e2be
91cae8a
8ae23d3
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
was this a speculative perf change? or was this driven from some actual data? i have no problem with it either way, i'm just curious.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is addressing RPS regression caught in validation PR.
Before: +6.3mb LOH allocation
https://devdiv.visualstudio.com/DefaultCollection/DevDiv/_git/VS/pullrequest/278169
After: +610kb LOH allocation
https://devdiv.visualstudio.com/DefaultCollection/DevDiv/_git/VS/pullrequest/278694
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@sharwell is your sdgmented array ready?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
i wish this was shared with some of our other logic elsewhere so that this would stay consistent with that if we ever change things.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You mean LSP?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
alternative: just mark the lambda as
static
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
so the static lambda will be compiled into same thing?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yup.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
is there some other value we can read in for this? i.e. i feel like this should be driven somewhat by:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yea, we are actually discussing this right now. Will probably come up with something soon (not in this PR though)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ok thanks :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I wonder what's the designed user scenario here?
After this change, if my computer is slow and it can't get the completion finished in 0.5s then does it mean I am unable to use this feature?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Right now, we unconditionally apply the timebox, so it means the if it takes more than 500ms, unimported extension methods wouldn't show by default even if you enabled the feature. But when that happens, you can still use expander button to make explicit request, which ignores the timebox.