That was such a cute lil post
this post was submitted on 28 Sep 2024
52 points (98.1% liked)
Rust
6005 readers
3 users here now
Welcome to the Rust community! This is a place to discuss about the Rust programming language.
Wormhole
Credits
- The icon is a modified version of the official rust logo (changing the colors to a gradient and black background)
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This was a great post, but is the last state of the macro actually bad for performance in any way? I get that it's ugly (and we should only choose to make code less readable like this when there's actually an issue) but is it worse for runtime performance?
Adding a single unused function should no effect on runtime performance. The compiler removes dead code during compilation, and there's no concept at runtime anyway of "creating a function" since it's just a compile-time construct to group reusable code (generally speaking - yes the pedants will be right when they say functions appear in the compiled output, to some extent).
Anyway, this can all be tested on Godbolt anyway if you want to verify yourself. Make a function with and without a nested unused function and check the output.
Runtime performance is entirely unaffected by the use of macros. It can have a negative impact on compile-time performance though, if you overdo it.
I understand that the macro only affects compile time but I'm talking about the extra function that's included in the resulting source code when the macro is expanded during compile. Based on other feedback, it looks like the unused function is optimized away.
Ah yes, exactly.