Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
make the docs for gensym slightly more precise (#45182)
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history 
fixes #44903
  • Loading branch information
@KristofferC
KristofferC authored May 5, 2022
1 parent 670f713 commit 902a5c1
Showing 1 changed file with 1 addition and 1 deletion.
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion base/expr.jl
View file
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ const is_expr = isexpr
"""
gensym([tag])
Generates a symbol which will not conflict with other variable names.
Generates a symbol which will not conflict with other variable names (in the same module).
"""
gensym() = ccall(:jl_gensym, Ref{Symbol}, ())

Expand Down

11 comments on commit 902a5c1

@nanosoldier
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Executing the daily package evaluation, I will reply here when finished:

@nanosoldier runtests(ALL, isdaily = true)

@nanosoldier
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Your package evaluation job has completed - possible new issues were detected. A full report can be found here.

@vtjnash
Copy link
Member

@vtjnash vtjnash commented on 902a5c1 May 6, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@nanosoldier runbenchmarks(ALL, isdaily = true)

@nanosoldier
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Your benchmark job has completed - possible performance regressions were detected. A full report can be found here.

@vtjnash
Copy link
Member

@vtjnash vtjnash commented on 902a5c1 May 7, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The union! function did somewhat poorly, which I don't think was expected, and I don't currently know the cause of

["collection", "set operations", ("Set", "Int", "union!", "BitSet")] 1.11 (25%) Inf (1%) ❌
["collection", "set operations", ("Set", "Int", "union!", "Set")] 1.10 (25%) Inf (1%) ❌
["collection", "set operations", ("Set", "Int", "union!", "Vector")] 1.12 (25%) Inf (1%)

@aviatesk
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@nanosoldier runbenchmarks("union", vs="@3d787a780d0baf279d005dd84698a4d8f52c66d6")

@aviatesk
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@nanosoldier runbenchmarks("collection", vs="@3d787a780d0baf279d005dd84698a4d8f52c66d6")

@nanosoldier
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Your benchmark job has completed - possible performance regressions were detected. A full report can be found here.

@nanosoldier
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Your benchmark job has completed - possible performance regressions were detected. A full report can be found here.

@aviatesk
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@nanosoldier runbenchmarks("collection", vs="@9a2f5ae0531524e60b3308d7695100b14801534e")

@nanosoldier
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Your benchmark job has completed - no performance regressions were detected. A full report can be found here.

Please sign in to comment.