From cbde0292b6d029b54cf4d8ef413a6f68adbb9acf Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: sterni Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2022 21:29:58 +0200 Subject: docs(tvix/eval): mention `?` and `or` for builtins optimisation Change-Id: Ifaa6da345d408a69ce46d6a0e7483352715c75bd Reviewed-on: https://cl.tvl.fyi/c/depot/+/6525 Autosubmit: sterni Reviewed-by: tazjin Tested-by: BuildkiteCI --- tvix/eval/docs/known-optimisation-potential.md | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'tvix/eval/docs/known-optimisation-potential.md') diff --git a/tvix/eval/docs/known-optimisation-potential.md b/tvix/eval/docs/known-optimisation-potential.md index 20884519cc44..fad773d7da63 100644 --- a/tvix/eval/docs/known-optimisation-potential.md +++ b/tvix/eval/docs/known-optimisation-potential.md @@ -55,7 +55,9 @@ optimisations, but note the most important ones here. When accessing identifiers like `builtins.foo`, the compiler should not go through the trouble of setting up the attribute set on the stack and accessing `foo` from it if it knows that the scope for - `builtins` is unpoisoned. + `builtins` is unpoisoned. The same optimisation can also be done + for the other set operations like `builtins ? foo` and + `builtins.foo or alternative-implementation`. The same thing goes for resolving `with builtins;`, which should definitely resolve statically. -- cgit 1.4.1