From: "kyanagi (Kouhei Yanagita)" Date: 2022-01-31T02:23:10+00:00 Subject: [ruby-core:107379] [Ruby master Feature#18515] Add Range#reverse_each implementation for performance Issue #18515 has been updated by kyanagi (Kouhei Yanagita). Dan0042 (Daniel DeLorme) wrote in #note-3: > I agree with both of those statements, but Integer is the only class that has #pred, so in practice "using pred" and "specialized implementation for Integer" are the same thing. Yes, that is exactly what you said. If I propose `#pred`-based `Range#reverse_each`, I will propose `Date#pred` too. To find out my PR implementation (iterating integers directly) is worthwhile even if a `#pred`-based implementation is introduced, we will need to measure the performance. I'll try it later. ---------------------------------------- Feature #18515: Add Range#reverse_each implementation for performance https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/18515#change-96281 * Author: kyanagi (Kouhei Yanagita) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal ---------------------------------------- PR is https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/5489 Current `Range#reverse_each` uses `Enumerable#reverse_each` which is implemented with `#to_a`. So we are virtually not able to use `reverse_each` for a very large or beginless range, even if few elements are iterated on actually. ``` (1..2**100).reverse_each { |x| p x; break if x.odd? } (..5).reverse_each { |x| p x; break if x == 0 } (1..2**32).reverse_each.lazy.select { |x| Prime.prime?(x) }.take(3).to_a ``` This patch, implements `Range#reverse_each` for Integer elements, enables these examples. I think `#reverse_each` for an endless range should raise an exception. This is a different issue, so I'll create another ticket later. -> posted: https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/18551 -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: