refactor: replace experimental libraries with their std versions #1620
Conversation
|
@G-Rath I think some tests break due to this change - can you help to fix? |
G-Rath
force-pushed
the
lint/replace-exp-libs
branch
4 times, most recently
from
4f6cc2c to
07924ad
Compare
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1620 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 64.60% 64.60%
=======================================
Files 156 156
Lines 16014 16014
=======================================
Hits 10346 10346
Misses 4986 4986
Partials 682 682 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
G-Rath
force-pushed
the
lint/replace-exp-libs
branch
from
22a42de to
3ec88e0
Compare
| @@ -423,7 +423,7 @@ func makeResultVuln(vuln resolution.Vulnerability) vulnOutput { | |||
| vk := sg.Nodes[sg.Dependency].Version | |||
| affected[packageOutput{Name: vk.Name, Version: vk.Version}] = struct{}{} | |||
| } | |||
| v.Packages = slices.Collect(maps.Keys(affected)) | |||
| v.Packages = slices.AppendSeq(make([]packageOutput, 0, len(affected)), maps.Keys(affected)) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this needed? It seems weird the .Collect doesn't reallocate slices.
Even if it does not, I think it is better to stick with Collect here until we see that this causes a performance problem just for code clarity
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Apparently using slices.AppendSeq is the "simplest true equivalent", and there is a performance difference.
It doesn't look like there's much difference between slices.Collect though, so I'm not fussed - I can do some benchmarking later too
G-Rath
force-pushed
the
lint/replace-exp-libs
branch
2 times, most recently
from
88c4e55 to
7923b1d
Compare
G-Rath
force-pushed
the
lint/replace-exp-libs
branch
from
7923b1d to
93546ec
Compare
These became stable in Go v1.21, so we can stop using the
x/expversions(this will be enforced by the
expotostdlinter which is being introduced in the next version of golanglint-ci)