Merged
Conversation
mame
reviewed
Nov 14, 2025
| * of the collection; returns the last element for which the block returns a | ||
| * truthy value: | ||
| * | ||
| * (0..9).find {|element| element > 2} # => 3 |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The examples need to be updated
Suggested change
| * (0..9).find {|element| element > 2} # => 3 | |
| * (0..9).rfind {|element| element < 5} # => 4 |
Comment on lines
+2143
to
+2145
| * (0..9).find(proc {false}) {|element| element > 12} # => false | ||
| * {foo: 0, bar: 1, baz: 2}.find {|key, value| key.start_with?('b') } # => [:bar, 1] | ||
| * {foo: 0, bar: 1, baz: 2}.find(proc {[]}) {|key, value| key.start_with?('c') } # => [] |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It would be better to provide examples more specific to rfind, but here's a temporary fix:
Suggested change
| * (0..9).find(proc {false}) {|element| element > 12} # => false | |
| * {foo: 0, bar: 1, baz: 2}.find {|key, value| key.start_with?('b') } # => [:bar, 1] | |
| * {foo: 0, bar: 1, baz: 2}.find(proc {[]}) {|key, value| key.start_with?('c') } # => [] | |
| * (0..9).rfind(proc {false}) {|element| element > 12} # => false | |
| * {foo: 0, bar: 1, baz: 2}.rfind {|key, value| key.start_with?('b') } # => [:baz, 2] | |
| * {foo: 0, bar: 1, baz: 2}.rfind(proc {[]}) {|key, value| key.start_with?('c') } # => [] |
|
|
||
| def test_rfind | ||
| ary = [1, 2, 3, 1, 2] | ||
| assert_equal(2, ary.rfind {|x| x % 2 == 0 }) |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see this test was ported from test_enum.rb, but shouldn't we add tests to verify behavior specific to rfind? This test doesn't distinguish which 2 is returned and doesn't express the difference from find.
mame
reviewed
Nov 14, 2025
| * | ||
| * Returns the first element for which the block returns a truthy value. | ||
| * | ||
| * With a block given, calls the block with successive elements of the collection; |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nitpicking: in Enumerable, it seems the word "collection" refers to the objects yielded by each method. However, I feel this word slightly off in Array. In fact, the word "collection" hardly appears at all in array.c.
As defined below, "elements" seems like a better choice.
Lines 8264 to 8265 in bec6961
Well, since it says "collection of objects", you could say it's not incorrect, though. Also, "successive elements of the elements" may be awkward. I cannot think of a better phrase. Just for your reference.
Contributor
|
I don't think you can cache |
Implement Array#rfind, which is the same as find except from the other side of the Array. Also implemented Array#find (as opposed to the generic one on Enumerable because it is significantly faster and to keep the implementations together. [Feature #21678]
170da6c to
409c331
Compare
Contributor
Author
|
Thanks @mame and @luke-gruber — I believe I've addressed both your comments. |
Member
|
@kddnewton Nice! Could you also add an entry for this in NEWS.md? |
Member
|
I pushed bbc10ed to make sure we don't forget, feel free to improve it/tweak it. |
Contributor
Author
|
Thanks that looks good. |
headius
added a commit
to jruby/jruby
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 31, 2025
swebb
added a commit
to swebb/ruby
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 11, 2026
Inspired by https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20182 and ruby#9533. This PR provides a performance boost to Array#find when run using JIT compilation. This is achieved by implementing Array#find in Ruby, which the JIT compiler can optimise. [PR#15189](ruby#15189) added a C implementation for Array#find instead of relying on Enumerable#find. This PR extends this by adding a Ruby implementation. I used the so_fasta benchmark to measure performance. No change in interpreted performance before/after: $ benchmark-driver -e "~/.rubies/ruby-master/bin/ruby; ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby" ../benchmark/so_fasta.rb Calculating ------------------------------------- ~/.rubies/ruby-master/bin/ruby ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby so_fasta 0.393 0.393 i/s - 1.000 times in 2.543209s 2.545514s Comparison: so_fasta ~/.rubies/ruby-master/bin/ruby: 0.4 i/s ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby: 0.4 i/s - 1.00x slower With YJIT enabled the speed is almost twice as fast: $ benchmark-driver -e "~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby; ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby --yjit" ../benchmark/so_fasta.rb Calculating ------------------------------------- ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby --yjit so_fasta 0.393 0.770 i/s - 1.000 times in 2.547550s 1.298371s Comparison: so_fasta ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby --yjit: 0.8 i/s ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby: 0.4 i/s - 1.96x slower
swebb
added a commit
to swebb/ruby
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 11, 2026
Inspired by https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20182 and ruby#9533. This PR provides a performance boost to Array#find when run using JIT compilation. This is achieved by implementing Array#find in Ruby, which the JIT compiler can optimise. [PR#15189](ruby#15189) added a C implementation for Array#find instead of relying on Enumerable#find. This PR extends this by adding a Ruby implementation. I used the so_fasta benchmark to measure performance. No change in interpreted performance before/after: $ benchmark-driver -e "~/.rubies/ruby-master/bin/ruby; ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby" ../benchmark/so_fasta.rb Calculating ------------------------------------- ~/.rubies/ruby-master/bin/ruby ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby so_fasta 0.393 0.393 i/s - 1.000 times in 2.543209s 2.545514s Comparison: so_fasta ~/.rubies/ruby-master/bin/ruby: 0.4 i/s ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby: 0.4 i/s - 1.00x slower With YJIT enabled Array#find is almost twice as fast: $ benchmark-driver -e "~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby; ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby --yjit" ../benchmark/so_fasta.rb Calculating ------------------------------------- ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby --yjit so_fasta 0.393 0.770 i/s - 1.000 times in 2.547550s 1.298371s Comparison: so_fasta ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby --yjit: 0.8 i/s ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby: 0.4 i/s - 1.96x slower
nobu
pushed a commit
to swebb/ruby
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 2, 2026
Inspired by https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20182 and ruby#9533. This PR provides a performance boost to Array#find when run using JIT compilation. This is achieved by implementing Array#find in Ruby, which the JIT compiler can optimise. [PR#15189](ruby#15189) added a C implementation for Array#find instead of relying on Enumerable#find. This PR extends this by adding a Ruby implementation. I used the so_fasta benchmark to measure performance. No change in interpreted performance before/after: $ benchmark-driver -e "~/.rubies/ruby-master/bin/ruby; ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby" ../benchmark/so_fasta.rb Calculating ------------------------------------- ~/.rubies/ruby-master/bin/ruby ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby so_fasta 0.393 0.393 i/s - 1.000 times in 2.543209s 2.545514s Comparison: so_fasta ~/.rubies/ruby-master/bin/ruby: 0.4 i/s ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby: 0.4 i/s - 1.00x slower With YJIT enabled Array#find is almost twice as fast: $ benchmark-driver -e "~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby; ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby --yjit" ../benchmark/so_fasta.rb Calculating ------------------------------------- ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby --yjit so_fasta 0.393 0.770 i/s - 1.000 times in 2.547550s 1.298371s Comparison: so_fasta ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby --yjit: 0.8 i/s ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby: 0.4 i/s - 1.96x slower
nobu
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 2, 2026
Inspired by https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20182 and #9533. This PR provides a performance boost to Array#find when run using JIT compilation. This is achieved by implementing Array#find in Ruby, which the JIT compiler can optimise. [PR#15189](#15189) added a C implementation for Array#find instead of relying on Enumerable#find. This PR extends this by adding a Ruby implementation. I used the so_fasta benchmark to measure performance. No change in interpreted performance before/after: $ benchmark-driver -e "~/.rubies/ruby-master/bin/ruby; ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby" ../benchmark/so_fasta.rb Calculating ------------------------------------- ~/.rubies/ruby-master/bin/ruby ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby so_fasta 0.393 0.393 i/s - 1.000 times in 2.543209s 2.545514s Comparison: so_fasta ~/.rubies/ruby-master/bin/ruby: 0.4 i/s ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby: 0.4 i/s - 1.00x slower With YJIT enabled Array#find is almost twice as fast: $ benchmark-driver -e "~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby; ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby --yjit" ../benchmark/so_fasta.rb Calculating ------------------------------------- ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby --yjit so_fasta 0.393 0.770 i/s - 1.000 times in 2.547550s 1.298371s Comparison: so_fasta ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby --yjit: 0.8 i/s ~/.rubies/ruby-array-find-native/bin/ruby: 0.4 i/s - 1.96x slower
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
4 participants
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.
Implement Array#rfind, which is the same as find except from the other side of the Array. Also implemented Array#find (as opposed to the generic one on Enumerable because it is significantly faster and to keep the implementations together.
[Feature #21678]