Skip to content
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
12 changes: 6 additions & 6 deletions README.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -196,7 +196,7 @@ delegated method: 2228579.5 i/s - 2.55x slower

##### `raise` vs `E2MM#Raise` for raising (and defining) exceptions [code](code/general/raise-vs-e2mmap.rb) [custom exception code](code/general/raise-custom-vs-e2mmap.rb)

Ruby's [Exception2MessageMapper module](http://ruby-doc.org/stdlib-2.2.0/libdoc/e2mmap/rdoc/index.html) allows one to define and raise exceptions with predefined messages.
Ruby's [Exception2MessageMapper module](https://ruby-doc.org/stdlib-2.2.0/libdoc/e2mmap/rdoc/index.html) allows one to define and raise exceptions with predefined messages.

```
$ ruby -v code/general/raise-vs-e2mmap.rb
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -1250,7 +1250,7 @@ Comparison:
##### `Hash#[]` vs `Hash#fetch` [code](code/hash/bracket-vs-fetch.rb)

If you use Ruby 2.2, `Symbol` could be more performant than `String` as `Hash` keys.
Read more regarding this: [Symbol GC in Ruby 2.2](http://www.sitepoint.com/symbol-gc-ruby-2-2/) and [Unraveling String Key Performance in Ruby 2.2](http://www.sitepoint.com/unraveling-string-key-performance-ruby-2-2/).
Read more regarding this: [Symbol GC in Ruby 2.2](https://www.sitepoint.com/symbol-gc-ruby-2-2/) and [Unraveling String Key Performance in Ruby 2.2](https://web.archive.org/web/20151222034748/http://www.sitepoint.com:80/unraveling-string-key-performance-ruby-2-2/).

```
$ ruby -v code/hash/bracket-vs-fetch.rb
Expand All @@ -1275,7 +1275,7 @@ Comparison:

##### `Hash#dig` vs `Hash#[]` vs `Hash#fetch` [code](code/hash/dig-vs-[]-vs-fetch.rb)

[Ruby 2.3 introduced `Hash#dig`](http://ruby-doc.org/core-2.3.0/Hash.html#method-i-dig) which is a readable
[Ruby 2.3 introduced `Hash#dig`](https://ruby-doc.org/core-2.3.0/Hash.html#method-i-dig) which is a readable
and performant option for retrieval from a nested hash, returning `nil` if an extraction step fails.
See [#102 (comment)](https://github.com/fastruby/fast-ruby/pull/102#issuecomment-198827506) for more info.

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -1308,7 +1308,7 @@ Comparison:

##### `Hash[]` vs `Hash#dup` [code](code/hash/bracket-vs-dup.rb)

Source: http://tenderlovemaking.com/2015/02/11/weird-stuff-with-hashes.html
Source: https://tenderlovemaking.com/2015/02/11/weird-stuff-with-hashes/

> Does this mean that you should switch to Hash[]?
> Only if your benchmarks can prove that it’s a bottleneck.
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -1818,7 +1818,7 @@ Comparison:
##### `Regexp#===` vs `Regexp#match` vs `Regexp#match?` vs `String#match` vs `String#=~` vs `String#match?` [code ](code/string/===-vs-=~-vs-match.rb)

`String#match?` and `Regexp#match?` are available on Ruby 2.4 or later.
ActiveSupport [provides](http://guides.rubyonrails.org/v5.1/active_support_core_extensions.html#match-questionmark)
ActiveSupport [provides](https://guides.rubyonrails.org/v5.1/active_support_core_extensions.html#match-questionmark)
a forward compatible extension of `Regexp` for older Rubies without the speed
improvement.

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -2316,7 +2316,7 @@ Feel free to talk with me on Twitter! <3

## Also Checkout

- [Derailed Benchmarks](https://github.com/schneems/derailed_benchmarks)
- [Derailed Benchmarks](https://github.com/zombocom/derailed_benchmarks)

Go faster, off the Rails - Benchmarks for your whole Rails app

Expand Down
Loading