3 ms·
This code should use OptionalLong instead of Optional.of() which doesn't have primitive overloads and caused wrapping of the long into a Long and extra heap ind
by esprehn 5y ago
This code should use OptionalLong instead of Optional.of() which doesn't have primitive overloads and caused wrapping of the long into a Long and extra heap indirections. It still probably can't beat Rust, but what's presented is probably not optimal.