Switch to emplace_back to avoid extra object #5291
Merged
Conversation
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
cebtenzzre
approved these changes
Feb 2, 2024
ggerganov
approved these changes
Feb 3, 2024
jordankanter
pushed a commit
to jordankanter/llama.cpp
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 13, 2024
hodlen
pushed a commit
to hodlen/llama.cpp
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 1, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
In the following cases switching to
.emplace_back()allows to simplify the code (e.g., avoid explicitstd::make_tuple()call) or allows to get rid of an extra temporary object (e.g.,.push_back("foo")will construct a temporary string and then move it, while.emplace_back("foo")will construct the string directly in the container.