ByteStrings: cross-boundary swar - #3430
Draft
pjfanning wants to merge 1 commit into
Draft
Conversation
pjfanning
marked this pull request as draft
August 13, 2026 10:45
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
The ByteString2 class (2-fragment ByteString) had cross-boundary read methods that used 8 individual byteAt calls for Long reads. Each byteAt call has a branch (check which fragment). The optimization:
Why not direct array access: The first/second fields are typed as ByteString (trait), and .bytes/.startIndex are private[pekko] on the concrete subclasses but not accessible from the nested ByteString2 class context. byteAtUnchecked provides the same bounds-check-skipping benefit through virtual dispatch.