abseil-cpp VS ripgrep

Yeah, it's nice! And Abseil does it, IFF you use LLVM libc++.

https://github.com/abseil/abseil-cpp/blob/master/absl/string...

The standard adopted it as resize_and_overwrite. Which I think is a little clunky.

This may be confusing to those familiar with Google's libraries. The baseline is the Go BTree, which I personally never heard of until just now, not the C++ absl::btree_set. The benchmarks aren't directly comparable, but the C++ version also comes with good microbenchmark coverage.

https://github.com/google/btree

https://github.com/abseil/abseil-cpp/blob/master/absl/contai...

An implementation of call_once that accommodates callbacks that throw: https://github.com/abseil/abseil-cpp/blob/master/absl/base/c...

I wouldn't say it's that cryptic. It's just a few bitwise rotations/shifts/xor operations.

You can see hashing optimizations as well https://www.deepmind.com/blog/alphadev-discovers-faster-sort..., https://github.com/abseil/abseil-cpp/commit/74eee2aff683cc7d...

I was one of the members who reviewed expertly what has been done both in sorting and hashing. Overall it's more about assembly, finding missed compiler optimizations and balancing between correctness and distribution (in hashing in particular).

It was not revolutionary in a sense it hasn't found completely new approaches but converged to something incomprehensible for humans but relatively good for performance which proves the point that optimal programs are very inhuman.

Note that for instructions in sorting, removing them does not always lead to better performance, for example, instructions can run in parallel and the effect can be less profound. Benchmarks can lie and compiler could do something differently when recompiling the sort3 function which was changed. There was some evidence that the effect can come from the other side.

For hashing it was even funnier, very small strings up to 64 bit already used 3 instructions like add some constant -> multiply 64x64 -> xor upper/lower. For bigger ones the question becomes more complicated, that's why 9-16 was a better spot and it simplified from 2 multiplications to just one and a rotation. Distribution on real workloads was good, it almost passed smhasher and we decided it was good enough to try out in prod. We did not rollback as you can see from abseil :)

But even given all that, it was fascinating to watch how this system was searching and was able to find particular programs can be further simplified. Kudos to everyone involved, it's a great incremental change that can bring more results in the future.

Check out https://abseil.io. It offers absl::optional, which is a backport of std::optional.

ripgrep - https://github.com/BurntSushi/ripgrep

Basic code searching skills seems like something new developers are never explicitly taught, but which is an absolutely crucial skill to build early on.

I guess the knowledge progression I would recommend would look something kind this:

- Learning about Ctrl+F, which works basically everywhere.

- Transitioning to ripgrep https://github.com/BurntSushi/ripgrep - I wouldn't even call this optional, it's truly an incredible and very discoverable tool. Requires keeping a terminal open, but that's a good thing for a newbie!

- Optional, but highly recommended: Learning one of the powerhouse command line editors. Teenage me recommended Emacs; current me recommends vanilla vim, purely because some flavor of it is installed almost everywhere. This is so that you can grep around and edit in the same window.

- In the same vein, moving back from ripgrep and learning about good old fashioned grep, with a few flags rg uses by default: `grep -r` for recursive search, `grep -ri` for case insensitive recursive search, and `grep -ril` for case insensitive recursive "just show me which files this string is found in" search. Some others too, season to taste.

- Finally hitting the wall with what ripgrep can do for you and switching to an actual indexed, dedicated code search tool.

live grep: ripgrep

The world has moved on though to opinionated tools, and Rust isn't even the furthest in that direction (That would be Go). The equivalent of those two lines in Cargo.toml would be this example of a basic configuration from the jacoco-maven-plugin: https://www.jacoco.org/jacoco/trunk/doc/examples/build/pom.x... - That's 40 lines in the section to do the "defaults".

Yes, you could add a load of config for files to include/exclude from coverage and so on, but the idea that that's a norm is way more common in Java projects than other languages. Like here's some example Cargo.toml files from complicated Rust projects:

Servo: https://github.com/servo/servo/blob/main/Cargo.toml

rust-gdext: https://github.com/godot-rust/gdext/blob/master/godot-core/C...

ripgrep: https://github.com/BurntSushi/ripgrep/blob/master/Cargo.toml

socketio: https://github.com/1c3t3a/rust-socketio/blob/main/socketio/C...

I'm not clear on why you're seeing the results you are. It could be because your haystack is so small that you're mostly just measuring noise. ripgrep 14 did introduce some optimizations in workloads like this by reducing match overhead, but I don't think it's anything huge in this case. (And I just tried ripgrep 13 on the same commands above and the timings are similar if a tiny bit slower.)

[1]: https://github.com/radare/ired

[2]: https://github.com/BurntSushi/ripgrep/discussions/2597

Explore o Ripgrep no repositório oficial: https://github.com/BurntSushi/ripgrep

🔎🗃️ ripgrep or ugrep (search fast, use regex patterns or fuzzy search, pipe output to bash/zsh shell for further processing V coloring)