Skip to content

⚡ Bolt: Use Set for O(1) lookups in array filtering#183

Open
anyulled wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
perf/set-lookups-1256936057135135519
Open

⚡ Bolt: Use Set for O(1) lookups in array filtering#183
anyulled wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
perf/set-lookups-1256936057135135519

Conversation

@anyulled
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

@anyulled anyulled commented Apr 27, 2026

💡 What: Converted O(n) array.includes() checks to O(1) Set.has() checks in ScheduleContainer and useTalks.
🎯 Why: Performing array.includes() inside an array.filter() loop results in O(nm) time complexity, which slows down rendering and data fetching for large arrays. Using a Set improves this to O(n+m).
📊 Impact: Reduces time complexity from O(n
m) to O(n+m) during client-side schedule filtering and speaker data mapping.
🔬 Measurement: Verified that tests pass and schedule filtering still works accurately without performance regressions.


PR created automatically by Jules for task 1256936057135135519 started by @anyulled

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Refactor
    • Improved internal performance optimization for session and speaker data filtering operations.

Converted O(n) array.includes checks to O(1) Set.has checks
in ScheduleContainer and useTalks. This improves time complexity
from O(n*m) to O(n+m) when filtering large arrays.

Co-authored-by: google-labs-jules[bot] <161369871+google-labs-jules[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
@google-labs-jules
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

👋 Jules, reporting for duty! I'm here to lend a hand with this pull request.

When you start a review, I'll add a 👀 emoji to each comment to let you know I've read it. I'll focus on feedback directed at me and will do my best to stay out of conversations between you and other bots or reviewers to keep the noise down.

I'll push a commit with your requested changes shortly after. Please note there might be a delay between these steps, but rest assured I'm on the job!

For more direct control, you can switch me to Reactive Mode. When this mode is on, I will only act on comments where you specifically mention me with @jules. You can find this option in the Pull Request section of your global Jules UI settings. You can always switch back!

New to Jules? Learn more at jules.google/docs.


For security, I will only act on instructions from the user who triggered this task.

@vercel
Copy link
Copy Markdown

vercel Bot commented Apr 27, 2026

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project Deployment Actions Updated (UTC)
devbcn-nextjs Ready Ready Preview, Comment Apr 27, 2026 9:15am

Request Review

@coderabbitai
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

coderabbitai Bot commented Apr 27, 2026

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: ed8e4ba8-aa80-4a62-8791-91509b67ffce

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between c98052a and d97e1fc.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)
  • components/schedule/ScheduleContainer.tsx
  • hooks/useTalks.ts

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Two performance optimizations were applied to reduce lookup complexity. ScheduleContainer now uses a Set for session filtering, and useTalks precomputes a Set for speaker membership checking. Both changes preserve existing behavior while improving lookup performance from O(n) to O(1).

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary
Performance Optimization
components/schedule/ScheduleContainer.tsx
Replaced Array.includes() with Set.has() for session filtering, improving membership check performance from O(n) to O(1).
Performance Optimization
hooks/useTalks.ts
Replaced Array.includes() with Set.has() for speaker membership checking in getTalkSpeakersWithDetails, maintaining the same speaker list semantics with optimized lookups.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

Possibly related PRs

Suggested labels

size/size/XXL

Poem

🐰 A speedy hop through logic's maze,
Sets replace arrays in our praise,
O(1) lookups shine so bright,
Membership checks take flight!
Optimization's work done right!

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name Status Explanation Resolution
Docstring Coverage ⚠️ Warning Docstring coverage is 0.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%. Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold.
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check ✅ Passed The title clearly and specifically describes the main change: converting array includes() to Set.has() for O(1) lookups in array filtering, which matches the core objective of the PR.
Linked Issues check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.

✨ Finishing Touches
📝 Generate docstrings
  • Create stacked PR
  • Commit on current branch
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch perf/set-lookups-1256936057135135519

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code Review

This pull request optimizes session and speaker filtering by converting ID arrays into Sets, improving lookup performance from linear to constant time within the filter operations. I have no feedback to provide.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant