starred/terminal
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/microsoft/terminal.git synced 2026-09-25 08:24:54 +00:00
Code Issues 19.0k Packages Projects Releases 20 Wiki Activity

[PR #16952] Replace til::some with til::small_vector #31074

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-01-31 09:44:54 +00:00 by claunia · 0 comments
claunia commented 2026-01-31 09:44:54 +00:00
Owner
Copy Link

Original Pull Request: https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/pull/16952

State: closed
Merged: Yes

til::small_vector had a bug: Its internal backing buffer didn't
prevent default initialization! Wrapping it in an union fixed that.

til::some had the same issue, but thinking about it I realized we
don't need both classes to exist, so I removed til::some since
til::small_vector is more flexible.

Checking the assembly, I noticed that til::small_vector with the
union fix produced a more compact result. I also noticed that in
combination with function calls and inlining the bit-wise ANDs in
the point/size/rect boolean operators produced poor-ish results.
Since their impact on performance is negligible to begin with I
simplified that code slightly.

Finally, I noticed that the boolean operator for til::point
was incorrect since it checked for >0 instead of >=0.
Luckily nothing seemed to have used that operator yet.
(= No inbox regression.)

**Original Pull Request:** https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/pull/16952 **State:** closed **Merged:** Yes --- `til::small_vector` had a bug: Its internal backing buffer didn't prevent default initialization! Wrapping it in an `union` fixed that. `til::some` had the same issue, but thinking about it I realized we don't need both classes to exist, so I removed `til::some` since `til::small_vector` is more flexible. Checking the assembly, I noticed that `til::small_vector` with the `union` fix produced a more compact result. I also noticed that in combination with function calls and inlining the bit-wise ANDs in the point/size/rect boolean operators produced poor-ish results. Since their impact on performance is negligible to begin with I simplified that code slightly. Finally, I noticed that the boolean operator for `til::point` was incorrect since it checked for `>0` instead of `>=0`. Luckily nothing seemed to have used that operator yet. (= No inbox regression.)
claunia added the pull-request label 2026-01-31 09:44:54 +00:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
⛺ Reserved
A11yCO
A11yMAS
A11ySev1
A11ySev2
A11ySev3
A11yTTValidated
A11yUsable
A11yVoiceAccess
A11yWCAG
Area-Accessibility
Area-AtlasEngine
Area-AzureShell
Area-Build
Area-Build
Area-Chat
Area-CmdPal
Area-CodeHealth
Area-Commandline
Area-CookedRead
Area-DefApp
Area-Extensibility
Area-Fonts
Area-GroupPolicy
Area-i18n
Area-Input
Area-Interaction
Area-Interop
Area-Localization
Area-Output
Area-Performance
Area-Portable
Area-Quality
Area-Remoting
Area-Rendering
Area-Schema
Area-Server
Area-Settings
Area-SettingsUI
Area-ShellExtension
Area-ShellExtension
Area-ShellExtension
Area-Suggestions
Area-Suggestions
Area-TerminalConnection
Area-TerminalControl
Area-Theming
Area-UserInterface
Area-VT
Area-Windowing
Area-WPFControl
AutoMerge
Blocking-Ingestion
Culprit-Centennial
Culprit-WinUI
Disability-All
Disability-Blind
Disability-LowVision
Disability-Mobility
External-Blocked-WinUI3
Fixed
Gathering-Data
good first issue
HCL-E+D
HCL-WindowsTerminal
Help Wanted
Impact-Compatibility
Impact-Compliance
Impact-Correctness
Impact-Visual
In-PR
InclusionBacklog
InclusionBacklog-Windows TerminalWin32
InclusionCommitted-202206
Issue-Bug
Issue-Docs
Issue-Feature
Issue-Feature
Issue-Question
Issue-Samples
Issue-Scenario
Issue-Task
Needs-Attention
Needs-Author-Feedback
Needs-Bisect
Needs-Discussion
Needs-Repro
Needs-Tag-Fix
Needs-Tag-Fix
Needs-Triage
No-Recent-Activity
Priority-0
Priority-1
Priority-2
Priority-3
Product-Cmd.exe
Product-Colortool
Product-Colortool
Product-Colortool
Product-Conhost
Product-Conpty
Product-Meta
Product-Powershell
Product-Terminal
Product-WSL
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 Resolution-Answered
Resolution-By-Design
Resolution-Duplicate
Resolution-External
Resolution-Fix-Available
Resolution-Fix-Committed
Resolution-No-Repro
Resolution-Won't-Fix
Severity-Blocking
Severity-Crash
Severity-DataLoss
spam
this-will-be-a-breaking-change
Tracking-External
WindowsTerminal_Win32
Work-Item
zAskModeBug
zInbox-Bug
No Label pull-request
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
claunia
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/terminal#31074
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?