Optimize cpptiny with single-buffer zero-copy design#15
Conversation
|
Warning Rate limit exceeded
Your organization is not enrolled in usage-based pricing. Contact your admin to enable usage-based pricing to continue reviews beyond the rate limit, or try again in 5 minutes and 19 seconds. ⌛ How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout. Please see our FAQ for further information. ℹ️ Review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (10)
Comment |
27a0b44 to
930aade
Compare
c724fc0 to
7def8d3
Compare
930aade to
8026e44
Compare
0759207 to
afb3f51
Compare
8026e44 to
abfab0e
Compare
afb3f51 to
7f9f728
Compare
- Replace dual read/write buffers with single shared buffer (~50% memory reduction) - Add zero-copy message<T>() and send<T>() API for packed structs - Add --unpacked flag for platforms without unaligned access support - Add compile-time static_assert to catch platform misuse
abfab0e to
65938fb
Compare
Summary
message<T>()andsend<T>()API for packed structs--unpackedflag for platforms without unaligned access supportstatic_assertto catch platform misuseTest plan
--unpackedmode compiles and works on ARM