Merged
Conversation
jcp19
approved these changes
May 26, 2022
Contributor
|
@ArquintL I suggest that we either close this PR or merge it. Any preference? |
Member
Author
|
It's an additional example so I'm more in favor of keeping it |
…_search_replace with additional shared variables
227ed96 to
e3ec81b
Compare
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Adds
parallel_search_replace_shared.gobra, which is a modification ofparallel_search_replace.gobra. It uses shared instead of exclusive variables in theworkerfunction.parallel_search_replace.gobratakes 60-66sec on my machineparallel_search_replace_shared.gobratakes 110-121sec on my machine