Cleanup/Optimization: Remove remaining LINQ usage in the compiler by vexx32 · Pull Request #13543 · PowerShell/PowerShell

vexx32 · 2020-08-29T17:23:12Z

PR Summary

Removed using System.Linq; for Compiler.cs
Replaced extension methods with more traditional and hopefully speedy logic
Replaced some IEnumerable<T> fields/variables/etc with IReadOnlyList<T> where appropriate
Reworked iterator methods that really didn't need to be iterator methods and had them return arrays or IReadOnlyList<T>
Added a new internal method for AST searching to avoid the need for LINQ usage in a couple cases
Replaced a couple usages of List when the set size is already known with T[].
Internal API AstSearcher.FindAll() was changed to return List rather than IEnumerable as it was already returning a list anyway, and it made handling its results easier in a few places.

PR Context

LINQ ain't the greatest for performance sensitive applications.

Related: #13474
Semi-related: #12930 and #12412, I'll probably end up with merge conflicts on this or those depending on which get merged first. Might also need to make some edits either here or in those PRs to ensure I'm not reintroducing LINQ in some fashion or another, I'll go over them once one is merged.

/cc @rjmholt @SeeminglyScience

PR Checklist

iSazonov

If we expect perf wins it would be great to measure and compare.

adityapatwardhan · 2020-08-31T18:24:47Z

@vexx32 Is there any noticeable difference in perf or parsing? Can you do a before / after comparison and add to the PR description.

vexx32 · 2020-09-01T03:16:01Z

@adityapatwardhan let me know how to go about doing that and I'd be happy to. This isn't a particularly accessible area of the code to run benchmarks on (not that anything in PS is very easy to benchmark individually anyway, really).

iSazonov · 2020-09-01T04:22:22Z

@vexx32 We have same options for perf measure:

Take a large script/module from a repository
Create custom targeted tests based on BenchmarkDotNet because Compiler is internal and could be directly referenced from tests. For example, we could call public object VisitScriptBlock(ScriptBlockAst scriptBlockAst).
Call public PSScriptCmdlet(ScriptBlock scriptBlock, bool useNewScope, bool fromScriptFile, ExecutionContext context) from internal sealed class PSScriptCmdlet

Perhaps there are more simple options.

SeeminglyScience · 2020-09-01T14:44:56Z

One thing I never understood with BenchmarkDotNet is how to benchmark between commits properly without ripping out all the associated code into separate standalone classes. Does anyone have experience with that? Do you have to just run separate tests and calculate the ratios yourself (and is that even accurate) or does BenchmarkDotNet have support for that? Really hard to google for some reason.

If someone can provide a template or some clear steps towards getting the before and after into the same test run, I'll work with @vexx32 to setup the actual benchmark.

iSazonov · 2020-09-02T05:10:39Z

@AndreyAkinshin Could you please help PowerShell contributors to understand how compare performance different commits with BenchmarkDotNet?

iSazonov · 2020-09-09T10:49:03Z

@vexx32 @SeeminglyScience I think we could use a tool mentioned in dotnet/runtime#41871

vexx32 · 2020-09-09T17:08:43Z

It looks like that would have to be a significant effort, largely from the PS team themselves; it doesn't look like something an individual contributor could feasibly set up.

iSazonov · 2020-09-09T17:23:05Z

I mean that they use a simple tool for comparison with a base line.

ghost · 2020-09-17T02:00:11Z

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Maintainer, please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

iSazonov · 2020-11-06T11:16:36Z

@vexx32 Can we split some changes to separate small PRs?

vexx32 · 2020-11-06T14:09:17Z

Eh... I mean, sure, I can if you want. Didn't think it was that large, but I can take a look later on and do things a bit more piecemeal, I suppose?

iSazonov · 2020-11-06T17:05:37Z

Didn't think it was that large

Yes, but it is very sensitive code and it would be better to keep the PR as a meta and split the work on small parts.

vexx32 · 2020-11-06T17:32:09Z

That is fair, I'll give it a look, thanks! 🙂

Co-authored-by: Ilya <darpa@yandex.ru>

daxian-dbw · 2021-09-11T00:21:18Z

I added a benchmark to test the compiler performance (PR is out: #16083). I ran the benchmark with and without changes from this PR, and the result with changes from this PR is even slightly worse.

Here are the details:

Preparation

The benchmark branch is checked out from the latest master branch.
I checked out the LinqBGone branch, and rebased it against the benchmark branch. So the only difference between benchmark and LinqBGone branches are the new changes from this PR.

Benchmarking

To run benchmark without changes from this PR, from the benchmark branch:

run git clean -fdx
run cd .\test\perf
run Import-Module .\perf.psm1 -Force
run Start-Benchmarking -Filter *Compile* -Artifacts C:\arena\tmp\compiler-perf-2\now\ for 10 times, and collect the results.

To run benchmark with changes from this PR, from the LinqBGone branch:

run git clean -fdx
run cd .\test\perf
run Import-Module .\perf.psm1 -Force
run Start-Benchmarking -Filter *Compile* -Artifacts C:\arena\tmp\compiler-perf-2\new\ for 10 times, and collect the results.

Result Data

Results without changes from this PR:

Click to see the results from the 10 runs

BenchmarkDotNet=v0.12.1.1521-nightly, OS=Windows 10.0.19043
Intel Core i7-1065G7 CPU 1.30GHz, 1 CPU, 8 logical and 4 physical cores
.NET SDK=6.0.100-preview.6.21355.2
  [Host]     : .NET 6.0.0 (6.0.21.35212), X64 RyuJIT
  Job-XKBQFO : .NET 6.0.0 (6.0.21.35212), X64 RyuJIT

EnvironmentVariables=POWERSHELL_TELEMETRY_OPTOUT=1  PowerPlanMode=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000  Arguments=/p:DebugType=portable

IterationTime=250.0000 ms  MaxIterationCount=20  MinIterationCount=15
WarmupCount=1

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	20.02 ms	0.522 ms	0.558 ms	19.78 ms	19.27 ms	21.03 ms	83.3333	-	-	456 KB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	21.30 ms	0.716 ms	0.825 ms	21.00 ms	20.22 ms	23.08 ms	90.9091	-	-	456 KB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	22.58 ms	1.528 ms	1.760 ms	22.88 ms	19.86 ms	25.21 ms	83.3333	-	-	458 KB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	20.61 ms	0.512 ms	0.569 ms	20.66 ms	19.52 ms	21.62 ms	83.3333	-	-	459 KB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	19.91 ms	0.346 ms	0.307 ms	19.89 ms	19.50 ms	20.45 ms	83.3333	-	-	459 KB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	21.11 ms	0.948 ms	1.092 ms	20.67 ms	19.73 ms	23.43 ms	90.9091	-	-	456 KB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	20.62 ms	0.836 ms	0.894 ms	20.31 ms	19.58 ms	22.88 ms	90.9091	-	-	458 KB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	22.19 ms	1.049 ms	1.208 ms	22.17 ms	20.05 ms	24.68 ms	83.3333	-	-	456 KB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	20.87 ms	1.026 ms	1.181 ms	20.44 ms	19.52 ms	23.34 ms	90.9091	-	-	456 KB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	20.75 ms	0.918 ms	0.982 ms	20.74 ms	19.44 ms	22.87 ms	83.3333	-	-	458 KB

Results with changes from this PR:

Click to see the results from the 10 runs

BenchmarkDotNet=v0.12.1.1521-nightly, OS=Windows 10.0.19043
Intel Core i7-1065G7 CPU 1.30GHz, 1 CPU, 8 logical and 4 physical cores
.NET SDK=6.0.100-preview.6.21355.2
  [Host]     : .NET 6.0.0 (6.0.21.35212), X64 RyuJIT
  Job-LKTXSI : .NET 6.0.0 (6.0.21.35212), X64 RyuJIT

EnvironmentVariables=POWERSHELL_TELEMETRY_OPTOUT=1  PowerPlanMode=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000  Arguments=/p:DebugType=portable

IterationTime=250.0000 ms  MaxIterationCount=20  MinIterationCount=15
WarmupCount=1

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	22.30 ms	0.612 ms	0.655 ms	22.40 ms	20.89 ms	23.69 ms	90.9091	-	-	457 KB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	21.17 ms	0.519 ms	0.533 ms	21.12 ms	19.78 ms	21.84 ms	90.9091	-	-	456 KB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	20.93 ms	1.056 ms	1.216 ms	20.97 ms	18.90 ms	22.87 ms	76.9231	-	-	456 KB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	21.79 ms	0.840 ms	0.967 ms	21.45 ms	20.59 ms	23.50 ms	83.3333	-	-	456 KB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	21.05 ms	0.914 ms	1.053 ms	20.97 ms	19.24 ms	22.96 ms	83.3333	-	-	456 KB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	20.71 ms	0.959 ms	1.104 ms	20.36 ms	19.14 ms	22.76 ms	90.9091	-	-	456 KB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	21.44 ms	1.061 ms	1.180 ms	21.60 ms	19.41 ms	23.83 ms	100.0000	-	-	455 KB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	21.65 ms	1.211 ms	1.394 ms	21.84 ms	19.66 ms	24.64 ms	90.9091	-	-	456 KB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	19.94 ms	0.207 ms	0.184 ms	19.95 ms	19.60 ms	20.29 ms	90.9091	-	-	456 KB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	20.38 ms	0.510 ms	0.546 ms	20.31 ms	19.59 ms	21.61 ms	83.3333	-	-	456 KB

Result Analysis

The mean times (Mean column) from the benchmarking runs without changes from this PR are slightly better than the benchmark runs with changes from this PR. (no significant differences, but slightly better, if you look into the data).
The gen-0 collects (Gen 0 column) from the benchmarking runs without changes from this PR are also slightly better than that from the runs with changes from this PR.
The allocated memory (Allocated column) from the benchmarking runs with changes from this PR are slightly less than that from the runs without changes from this PR. (about 2-3kb less in 4 out of 10 runs, other runs have the same allocated memory)

So, only the allocated memory is slightly better with the changes in this PR, but somehow the gen-0 collects is more, and thus the mean time is worse comparing with the existing code.

@vexx32 @iSazonov Please take a look at the benchmark PR #16083 and see if I missed anything in my benchmark. If not, please also try run the benchmark to see if you get similar results.

daxian-dbw · 2021-09-11T06:06:20Z

Hmmm, when increase the size of the test script, the results with the changes from this PR seems a little better. I chose to use the PSModule.psm1 file from the PowerShellGet module, whose size is 1.3mb. Comparing to build.psm1 (123kb), PSModule.psm1 is way larger.

Result Data

Results without changes from this PR:

Click to see the results from 6 runs

BenchmarkDotNet=v0.13.1, OS=Windows 10.0.19043.1165 (21H1/May2021Update)
Intel Core i7-1065G7 CPU 1.30GHz, 1 CPU, 8 logical and 4 physical cores
.NET SDK=6.0.100-preview.6.21355.2
  [Host]     : .NET 6.0.0 (6.0.21.35212), X64 RyuJIT
  Job-TLRODV : .NET 6.0.0 (6.0.21.35212), X64 RyuJIT

EnvironmentVariables=POWERSHELL_TELEMETRY_OPTOUT=1  PowerPlanMode=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000  Arguments=/p:DebugType=portable

IterationTime=250.0000 ms  MaxIterationCount=20  MinIterationCount=15
WarmupCount=1

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	103.0 ms	2.88 ms	3.31 ms	101.7 ms	98.39 ms	109.8 ms	1 MB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	101.7 ms	2.03 ms	2.26 ms	102.3 ms	96.60 ms	104.9 ms	1 MB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	99.28 ms	1.612 ms	1.507 ms	99.02 ms	97.11 ms	101.5 ms	1 MB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	96.21 ms	1.928 ms	2.221 ms	96.24 ms	93.09 ms	100.7 ms	1 MB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	97.41 ms	3.572 ms	3.970 ms	95.29 ms	93.68 ms	106.5 ms	1 MB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	91.43 ms	1.782 ms	1.750 ms	90.81 ms	89.38 ms	95.80 ms	1 MB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	95.05 ms	2.192 ms	2.524 ms	94.01 ms	91.74 ms	100.0 ms	1 MB

Results with changes from this PR:

Click to see the results from 6 runs

BenchmarkDotNet=v0.13.1, OS=Windows 10.0.19043.1165 (21H1/May2021Update)
Intel Core i7-1065G7 CPU 1.30GHz, 1 CPU, 8 logical and 4 physical cores
.NET SDK=6.0.100-preview.6.21355.2
  [Host]     : .NET 6.0.0 (6.0.21.35212), X64 RyuJIT
  Job-KKVGUA : .NET 6.0.0 (6.0.21.35212), X64 RyuJIT

EnvironmentVariables=POWERSHELL_TELEMETRY_OPTOUT=1  PowerPlanMode=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000  Arguments=/p:DebugType=portable

IterationTime=250.0000 ms  MaxIterationCount=20  MinIterationCount=15
WarmupCount=1

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	95.36 ms	2.668 ms	2.966 ms	95.75 ms	91.22 ms	100.9 ms	1 MB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	92.41 ms	1.843 ms	2.123 ms	92.43 ms	89.01 ms	97.16 ms	1 MB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	90.98 ms	1.352 ms	1.389 ms	90.89 ms	89.49 ms	94.71 ms	1 MB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	92.70 ms	1.769 ms	2.037 ms	92.96 ms	89.41 ms	95.92 ms	1 MB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	93.48 ms	3.321 ms	3.825 ms	93.39 ms	85.67 ms	101.8 ms	1 MB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	93.23 ms	2.341 ms	2.696 ms	92.56 ms	89.67 ms	98.06 ms	1 MB

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Gen 0	Allocated
CompileBuildModule	90.15 ms	1.797 ms	1.500 ms	90.10 ms	88.17 ms	92.69 ms	250.0000	1 MB

Data Analysis

The average of Mean time to compile PSMoudle.psm1 script with the current existing code is 97.726 ms, while the average Mean time for the same with the changes from this PR is 92.616 ms. So, it shows about 5% improvement.

Allocated memory is about the same -- 1mb. But it's weird that there is no GC collects shown for most of the runs.

vexx32 · 2021-09-11T08:32:11Z

Interesting. I've not had time to run through myself but I'll give it a go this weekend.

Would be curious whether there's a difference in compiling something class-heavy vs function-heavy vs general script as well.

iSazonov · 2021-09-13T06:30:12Z

I made some experiments with the code before and found the code very optimized (by Jason Shirk I guess 👍 ). And I'd be very wonder if we would have seen a marked increase in performance in such a large synthetic test (milliseconds) while doing some specific micro-optimizations (nano-seconds).
We would have to create script code for each change from this PR so that the test shows a clearly visible performance gain.

ghost · 2021-09-21T02:00:37Z

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Maintainer, please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

adityapatwardhan · 2021-12-09T01:18:39Z

Closing and re-opening PR to get the new CIs working for this PR.

pull-request-quantifier-deprecated · 2021-12-09T01:18:46Z

This PR has 369 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

Quantification details

Label      : Large
Size       : +255 -114
Percentile : 76.9%

Total files changed: 4

Change summary by file extension:
.cs : +255 -114

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

Fast and predictable releases to production:
- Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
  iterations.
- Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
- Bugs are more likely to be detected.
- Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detetcted.
Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
- Small portions can be assimilated better.
Better engineering practices are exercised:
- Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
- Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
- Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
- Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
- Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
- Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
Change your engineering behaviors
- For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
  - Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
  - Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

One line was added: +1 -0
One line was deleted: +0 -1
One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

Was this comment helpful? 👍 :ok_hand: :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

adityapatwardhan · 2021-12-09T01:32:38Z

I added 'Review-Maintainer' label to discuss whether we should take this change or not as the demonstrated benefit is not very large,

iSazonov · 2021-12-09T04:28:07Z

My conclusion was #13543 (comment)
I always welcome the slightest improvement in performance and following the repo rules.

ghost · 2021-12-16T14:00:47Z

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Maintainer, please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

adityapatwardhan · 2022-05-23T19:05:42Z

I don't think we have demonstrated a substantial improvement as compared to the current code. We would like to reduce the risk on regressions in a sensitive piece of code and not take this PR.

vexx32 requested a review from daxian-dbw as a code owner August 29, 2020 17:23

ghost assigned adityapatwardhan Aug 29, 2020

SeeminglyScience reviewed Aug 29, 2020

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/System.Management.Automation/engine/parser/Compiler.cs Outdated

rjmholt self-requested a review August 29, 2020 19:13

vexx32 force-pushed the LinqBGone branch 5 times, most recently from 582a271 to cc16044 Compare August 30, 2020 00:02

iSazonov reviewed Aug 31, 2020

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/System.Management.Automation/engine/parser/AstVisitor.cs Outdated

iSazonov reviewed Aug 31, 2020

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/System.Management.Automation/engine/parser/Compiler.cs Outdated

iSazonov reviewed Aug 31, 2020

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/System.Management.Automation/engine/parser/Compiler.cs Outdated

vexx32 force-pushed the LinqBGone branch from 334aee0 to 6a2474f Compare August 31, 2020 15:41

iSazonov reviewed Aug 31, 2020

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/System.Management.Automation/engine/parser/Compiler.cs Outdated

Comment thread src/System.Management.Automation/engine/parser/Compiler.cs Outdated

Comment thread src/System.Management.Automation/engine/parser/Compiler.cs Outdated

ghost added the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Sep 17, 2020

ghost removed the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Nov 6, 2020

iSazonov reviewed Sep 9, 2021

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/System.Management.Automation/engine/parser/Compiler.cs

iSazonov reviewed Sep 9, 2021

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/System.Management.Automation/engine/parser/Compiler.cs Outdated

iSazonov reviewed Sep 9, 2021

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/System.Management.Automation/engine/parser/Compiler.cs Outdated

♻️ Incorporate Ilya's suggestions

43ea9ab

Co-authored-by: Ilya <darpa@yandex.ru>

vexx32 force-pushed the LinqBGone branch from 9668399 to 43ea9ab Compare September 10, 2021 02:19

iSazonov approved these changes Sep 10, 2021

View reviewed changes

ghost added the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Sep 21, 2021

adityapatwardhan approved these changes Dec 9, 2021

View reviewed changes

adityapatwardhan closed this Dec 9, 2021

adityapatwardhan reopened this Dec 9, 2021

ghost removed the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Dec 9, 2021

pull-request-quantifier-deprecated Bot added the Large label Dec 9, 2021

adityapatwardhan enabled auto-merge (squash) December 9, 2021 01:19

adityapatwardhan disabled auto-merge December 9, 2021 01:22

adityapatwardhan added the Review - Maintainer The PR/issue needs a review from the PowerShell repo Maintainers label Dec 9, 2021

ghost added the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Dec 16, 2021

adityapatwardhan closed this May 23, 2022

ghost removed the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label May 23, 2022

adityapatwardhan removed the Review - Maintainer The PR/issue needs a review from the PowerShell repo Maintainers label Jun 7, 2022

Conversation

vexx32 commented Aug 29, 2020 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

PR Summary

PR Context

PR Checklist

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

iSazonov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

adityapatwardhan commented Aug 31, 2020

Uh oh!

vexx32 commented Sep 1, 2020

Uh oh!

iSazonov commented Sep 1, 2020

Uh oh!

SeeminglyScience commented Sep 1, 2020 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

iSazonov commented Sep 2, 2020

Uh oh!

iSazonov commented Sep 9, 2020

Uh oh!

vexx32 commented Sep 9, 2020

Uh oh!

iSazonov commented Sep 9, 2020

Uh oh!

ghost commented Sep 17, 2020

Uh oh!

iSazonov commented Nov 6, 2020

Uh oh!

vexx32 commented Nov 6, 2020

Uh oh!

iSazonov commented Nov 6, 2020

Uh oh!

vexx32 commented Nov 6, 2020

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

daxian-dbw commented Sep 11, 2021 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Preparation

Benchmarking

Result Data

Result Analysis

Uh oh!

daxian-dbw commented Sep 11, 2021 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Result Data

Data Analysis

Uh oh!

vexx32 commented Sep 11, 2021 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

iSazonov commented Sep 13, 2021

Uh oh!

ghost commented Sep 21, 2021

Uh oh!

adityapatwardhan commented Dec 9, 2021

Uh oh!

pull-request-quantifier-deprecated Bot commented Dec 9, 2021

What can I do to optimize my changes

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

Uh oh!

adityapatwardhan commented Dec 9, 2021 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

iSazonov commented Dec 9, 2021

vexx32 commented Aug 29, 2020 •

edited

Loading

SeeminglyScience commented Sep 1, 2020 •

edited

Loading

daxian-dbw commented Sep 11, 2021 •

edited

Loading

daxian-dbw commented Sep 11, 2021 •

edited

Loading

vexx32 commented Sep 11, 2021 •

edited

Loading

adityapatwardhan commented Dec 9, 2021 •

edited

Loading