From 2fe8435f08306e8eb19ca91cc4b03ab9f9655cef Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Tackx Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2026 16:05:02 +0000 Subject: _content/blog/allocation-optimizations: fix typo Fix a typo I noticed while reading the article. Change-Id: I0e7159922cd60aafd0de498914eb8a60fd58a87a GitHub-Last-Rev: b0a080fcc2c0b47a3597310098d2d50315476bda GitHub-Pull-Request: golang/website#347 Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/website/+/750020 Reviewed-by: Keith Randall Reviewed-by: Dmitri Shuralyov Auto-Submit: Dmitri Shuralyov LUCI-TryBot-Result: Go LUCI Reviewed-by: Keith Randall Reviewed-by: Dmitri Shuralyov --- _content/blog/allocation-optimizations.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/_content/blog/allocation-optimizations.md b/_content/blog/allocation-optimizations.md index d69e4ced..130d3305 100644 --- a/_content/blog/allocation-optimizations.md +++ b/_content/blog/allocation-optimizations.md @@ -276,7 +276,7 @@ the heap copy. This ensures that for our original `extract` code, if the number of items fits in our small stack-allocated buffer, we perform exactly 1 allocation of exactly the right size. If the number of items exceeds -the capacity our small stack-allocated buffer, we do our normal +the capacity of our small stack-allocated buffer, we do our normal doubling-allocation once the stack-allocated buffer overflows. The optimization that Go 1.26 does is actually better than the -- cgit v1.3