-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.8k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Subtract instead of building the cartesian product in targets #65123
Conversation
See #64000 (comment). These targets were quite expensive and noticeable in no-op builds. Instead of building the cartesian product via item batching, using subtraction which avoids unnecessary items to be computed.
Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-infrastructure-libraries Issue DetailsSee #64000 (comment). These targets were quite expensive and noticeable in no-op builds. Instead of building the cartesian product via item batching, using subtraction which avoids unnecessary items to be computed.
|
Condition="'%(_resolvedP2PFiltered.ProjectReferenceItemSpec)' == '%(_resolvedP2PFiltered.MSBuildSourceProjectFile)' and | ||
<_resolvedP2PFiltered Include="@(ProjectReference)" | ||
ProjectReferenceItemSpec="$([System.IO.Path]::GetFullPath('%(ProjectReference.Identity)'))" | ||
SkipUseReferenceAssembly="%(ProjectReference.SkipUseReferenceAssembly)" /> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is just a style change to use the less verbose attribute syntax.
See #64000 (comment). These targets were quite expensive and noticeable in no-op builds. Instead of building the cartesian product via item batching, using subtraction which avoids unnecessary items to be computed.