Can Span<T>.SequenceEqual be optimized further to be faster for small buffers (buffer.Length < 5)?

[ahsonkhan]

SequenceEqual performs much better than a naive linear search for any buffer with length >= 8.
However, the linear search does better for buffers of length 0-4 (and is on par for 5-7).

It would be great if it was always better, even for smaller buffers. Is that possible to achieve (of course, without regressing perf for larger buffers)?

Specifically Span<byte>.SequenceEqual.

runtime/src/libraries/System.Private.CoreLib/src/System/MemoryExtensions.cs

Lines 421 to 437 in 83e30cc

	[MethodImpl(MethodImplOptions.AggressiveInlining)]
	public static bool SequenceEqual<T>(this Span<T> span, ReadOnlySpan<T> other) where T : IEquatable<T>
	{
	int length = span.Length;
	if (RuntimeHelpers.IsBitwiseEquatable<T>())
	{
	nuint size = (nuint)Unsafe.SizeOf<T>();
	return length == other.Length &&
	SpanHelpers.SequenceEqual(
	ref Unsafe.As<T, byte>(ref MemoryMarshal.GetReference(span)),
	ref Unsafe.As<T, byte>(ref MemoryMarshal.GetReference(other)),
	((nuint)length) * size); // If this multiplication overflows, the Span we got overflows the entire address range. There's no happy outcome for this api in such a case so we choose not to take the overhead of checking.
	}
	return length == other.Length && SpanHelpers.SequenceEqual(ref MemoryMarshal.GetReference(span), ref MemoryMarshal.GetReference(other), length);
	}

SequenceEqualThreshold benchmark

public class SequenceEqualThreshold
{
    private byte[] _input;
    private byte[] _expected;

    [Params(1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12)]
    public int Length;

    [GlobalSetup]
    public void Setup()
    {
        var builder = new StringBuilder();
        for (int i = 0; i < Length; i++)
        {
            builder.Append("a");
        }
        string input = builder.ToString();
        _input = Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(input);
        _expected = Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(input);
    }

    [Benchmark(Baseline = true)]
    public bool UseLinearSearch()
    {
        if (_input.Length != _expected.Length)
        {
            return false;
        }

        for (int i = 0; i < _input.Length; i++)
        {
            if (_input[i] != _expected[i])
            {
                return false;
            }
        }
        return true;
    }

    [Benchmark]
    public bool UseSequenceEqual()
    {
        return _input.AsSpan().SequenceEqual(_expected);
    }
}

Benchmark results

BenchmarkDotNet=v0.12.0, OS=Windows 10.0.19041
Intel Core i7-6700 CPU 3.40GHz (Skylake), 1 CPU, 8 logical and 4 physical cores
.NET Core SDK=5.0.100-alpha1-015914
  [Host]     : .NET Core 5.0.0 (CoreCLR 5.0.19.56303, CoreFX 5.0.19.56306), X64 RyuJIT
  Job-YKNBMP : .NET Core 5.0.0 (CoreCLR 5.0.19.56303, CoreFX 5.0.19.56306), X64 RyuJIT

PowerPlanMode=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000  MaxIterationCount=10  MinIterationCount=5  
WarmupCount=3  

Method	Length	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Ratio	RatioSD	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
UseLinearSearch	1	1.351 ns	0.1262 ns	0.0751 ns	1.324 ns	1.264 ns	1.511 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	1	4.491 ns	0.7360 ns	0.4868 ns	4.418 ns	3.986 ns	5.459 ns	3.38	0.44	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	2	2.031 ns	0.0687 ns	0.0178 ns	2.029 ns	2.014 ns	2.055 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	2	4.773 ns	0.4279 ns	0.2547 ns	4.750 ns	4.401 ns	5.326 ns	2.30	0.10	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	3	3.799 ns	0.2879 ns	0.1904 ns	3.792 ns	3.506 ns	4.057 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	3	5.020 ns	0.2169 ns	0.1291 ns	4.994 ns	4.854 ns	5.307 ns	1.31	0.05	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	4	4.940 ns	0.1176 ns	0.0700 ns	4.921 ns	4.838 ns	5.038 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	4	5.386 ns	0.1460 ns	0.0966 ns	5.372 ns	5.256 ns	5.524 ns	1.09	0.02	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	5	5.632 ns	0.1036 ns	0.0269 ns	5.630 ns	5.605 ns	5.674 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	5	6.005 ns	0.1360 ns	0.0711 ns	6.023 ns	5.842 ns	6.064 ns	1.06	0.02	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	6	7.025 ns	0.1526 ns	0.0908 ns	6.993 ns	6.919 ns	7.188 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	6	6.756 ns	0.5756 ns	0.3010 ns	6.680 ns	6.366 ns	7.340 ns	0.96	0.05	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	7	7.992 ns	0.6298 ns	0.4166 ns	7.901 ns	7.456 ns	8.866 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	7	6.867 ns	0.4282 ns	0.2833 ns	6.834 ns	6.516 ns	7.451 ns	0.86	0.07	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	8	8.392 ns	0.1844 ns	0.0819 ns	8.391 ns	8.269 ns	8.522 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	8	3.467 ns	0.1260 ns	0.0750 ns	3.450 ns	3.353 ns	3.619 ns	0.42	0.01	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	9	8.667 ns	0.6494 ns	0.1686 ns	8.599 ns	8.554 ns	8.965 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	9	4.055 ns	0.1404 ns	0.0734 ns	4.057 ns	3.933 ns	4.144 ns	0.46	0.01	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	10	11.770 ns	1.8212 ns	1.2046 ns	11.852 ns	9.831 ns	13.787 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	10	4.605 ns	0.8492 ns	0.5054 ns	4.519 ns	3.977 ns	5.570 ns	0.40	0.08	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	11	12.292 ns	1.7350 ns	1.1476 ns	12.342 ns	9.277 ns	13.356 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	11	4.291 ns	0.6357 ns	0.3325 ns	4.323 ns	3.743 ns	4.661 ns	0.34	0.03	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	12	10.635 ns	0.7017 ns	0.4641 ns	10.520 ns	10.048 ns	11.304 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	12	4.086 ns	0.5284 ns	0.2764 ns	4.190 ns	3.721 ns	4.360 ns	0.38	0.02	-	-	-	-

This shows up in implementations within the JSON context like comparing known ASCII property names (which tend to be small).

Processing JSON metadata properties benchmark

[BenchmarkCategory(Categories.CoreFX, Categories.JSON)]
public class SequenceEqualMetadataSampleTest
{
    private byte[] _name;

    [Params("", "$", "$id", "$ref", "$values", 
        "a", "foo", "food", "foods", "1234567", 
        "$if", "$res", "$valueZ", 
        "large string with a bunch of things in it", 
        "$large string with a bunch of things in it")]
    public string Name;

    [GlobalSetup]
    public void Setup()
    {
        _name = Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(Name);
    }

    [Benchmark(Baseline = true)]
    public void UseLinearSearch()
    {
        ReturnLinear(_name);
    }

    [Benchmark]
    public void UseSequenceEqual()
    {
        ReturnSequenceEqual(_name);
    }

    private static MetadataPropertyName ReturnLinear(ReadOnlySpan<byte> propertyName)
    {
        if (propertyName.Length > 0 && propertyName[0] == '$')
        {
            switch (propertyName.Length)
            {
                case 3:
                    if (propertyName[1] == 'i' &&
                        propertyName[2] == 'd')
                    {
                        return MetadataPropertyName.Id;
                    }
                    break;

                case 4:
                    if (propertyName[1] == 'r' &&
                        propertyName[2] == 'e' &&
                        propertyName[3] == 'f')
                    {
                        return MetadataPropertyName.Ref;
                    }
                    break;

                case 7:
                    if (propertyName[1] == 'v' &&
                        propertyName[2] == 'a' &&
                        propertyName[3] == 'l' &&
                        propertyName[4] == 'u' &&
                        propertyName[5] == 'e' &&
                        propertyName[6] == 's')
                    {
                        return MetadataPropertyName.Values;
                    }
                    break;
            }
        }

        return MetadataPropertyName.NoMetadata;
    }

    private static readonly byte[] _id = Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes("$id");
    private static readonly byte[] _ref = Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes("$ref");
    private static readonly byte[] _values = Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes("$values");

    private static MetadataPropertyName ReturnSequenceEqual(ReadOnlySpan<byte> propertyName)
    {
        switch (propertyName.Length)
        {
            case 3:
                if (propertyName.SequenceEqual(_id))
                {
                    return MetadataPropertyName.Id;
                }
                break;

            case 4:
                if (propertyName.SequenceEqual(_ref))
                {
                    return MetadataPropertyName.Ref;
                }
                break;

            case 7:
                if (propertyName.SequenceEqual(_values))
                {
                    return MetadataPropertyName.Values;
                }
                break;
        }

        return MetadataPropertyName.NoMetadata;
    }

    private enum MetadataPropertyName
    {
        NoMetadata,
        Values,
        Id,
        Ref,
    }
}

Benchmark results

BenchmarkDotNet=v0.12.0, OS=Windows 10.0.19041
Intel Core i7-6700 CPU 3.40GHz (Skylake), 1 CPU, 8 logical and 4 physical cores
.NET Core SDK=5.0.100-alpha1-015914
  [Host]     : .NET Core 5.0.0 (CoreCLR 5.0.19.56303, CoreFX 5.0.19.56306), X64 RyuJIT
  Job-WQXUIX : .NET Core 5.0.0 (CoreCLR 5.0.19.56303, CoreFX 5.0.19.56306), X64 RyuJIT

PowerPlanMode=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000  MaxIterationCount=10  MinIterationCount=5  
WarmupCount=3  

Method	Name	Mean	Error	StdDev	Median	Min	Max	Ratio	RatioSD	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
UseLinearSearch	****	2.740 ns	0.2049 ns	0.1356 ns	2.721 ns	2.573 ns	2.991 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual		2.019 ns	0.1023 ns	0.0677 ns	2.015 ns	1.912 ns	2.159 ns	0.74	0.05	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	$	2.896 ns	0.1635 ns	0.1082 ns	2.889 ns	2.745 ns	3.093 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	$	1.969 ns	0.0692 ns	0.0247 ns	1.961 ns	1.943 ns	2.008 ns	0.68	0.03	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	$id	3.809 ns	0.6716 ns	0.4443 ns	3.793 ns	3.237 ns	4.692 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	$id	6.681 ns	0.4008 ns	0.2651 ns	6.675 ns	6.310 ns	7.112 ns	1.77	0.21	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	$if	4.001 ns	0.6197 ns	0.4099 ns	3.955 ns	3.486 ns	4.679 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	$if	7.995 ns	0.3194 ns	0.2112 ns	7.994 ns	7.723 ns	8.447 ns	2.02	0.22	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	$large string(...) things in it [42]	2.895 ns	0.1503 ns	0.0994 ns	2.917 ns	2.762 ns	3.026 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	$large string(...) things in it [42]	2.026 ns	0.0628 ns	0.0224 ns	2.024 ns	1.999 ns	2.052 ns	0.70	0.03	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	$ref	3.412 ns	0.0897 ns	0.0320 ns	3.418 ns	3.359 ns	3.445 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	$ref	7.791 ns	0.1721 ns	0.1138 ns	7.816 ns	7.567 ns	7.957 ns	2.28	0.04	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	$res	3.413 ns	0.1726 ns	0.1142 ns	3.395 ns	3.257 ns	3.633 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	$res	8.513 ns	0.2731 ns	0.1807 ns	8.509 ns	8.238 ns	8.775 ns	2.50	0.09	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	$valueZ	4.000 ns	0.1121 ns	0.0741 ns	3.988 ns	3.901 ns	4.117 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	$valueZ	8.213 ns	0.3252 ns	0.2151 ns	8.156 ns	8.000 ns	8.695 ns	2.05	0.07	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	$values	3.596 ns	0.2866 ns	0.1896 ns	3.521 ns	3.350 ns	3.952 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	$values	8.112 ns	0.1673 ns	0.0597 ns	8.105 ns	8.036 ns	8.206 ns	2.20	0.11	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	1234567	2.678 ns	0.4838 ns	0.2879 ns	2.652 ns	2.407 ns	3.319 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	1234567	5.977 ns	0.4423 ns	0.1149 ns	5.931 ns	5.902 ns	6.180 ns	2.10	0.14	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	a	2.484 ns	0.2543 ns	0.1682 ns	2.423 ns	2.312 ns	2.797 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	a	2.211 ns	0.2269 ns	0.1501 ns	2.221 ns	1.966 ns	2.481 ns	0.89	0.08	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	foo	2.286 ns	0.1816 ns	0.1201 ns	2.298 ns	2.138 ns	2.493 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	foo	5.850 ns	0.3409 ns	0.0885 ns	5.827 ns	5.790 ns	6.005 ns	2.46	0.10	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	food	2.244 ns	0.0763 ns	0.0339 ns	2.239 ns	2.208 ns	2.290 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	food	6.162 ns	0.5158 ns	0.3412 ns	6.088 ns	5.714 ns	6.683 ns	2.81	0.13	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	foods	2.315 ns	0.2423 ns	0.1603 ns	2.252 ns	2.134 ns	2.556 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	foods	2.366 ns	0.1825 ns	0.1207 ns	2.367 ns	2.198 ns	2.605 ns	1.03	0.10	-	-	-	-
UseLinearSearch	large string (...) things in it [41]	2.206 ns	0.1903 ns	0.1259 ns	2.144 ns	2.079 ns	2.454 ns	1.00	0.00	-	-	-	-
UseSequenceEqual	large string (...) things in it [41]	2.033 ns	0.2422 ns	0.1602 ns	1.958 ns	1.880 ns	2.335 ns	0.92	0.09	-	-	-	-

@benaadams, @GrabYourPitchforks - got any suggestions?

FYI @jozkee, @steveharter

[benaadams]

If you want to get more wild with gotos I think it could be done as per #402 (comment)

[GrabYourPitchforks]

+1 to Ben's suggestion. Another pattern which is more common in C-style libraries is to expose a secondary method that uses an alternative algorithm. Let's call it SequenceEqualSequential (ugh) for now. The implementation of this method would be that it's a naive element-by-element iterator, which is great for smaller inputs, and it's up to the caller to know which of the two is more appropriate for the scenario.

[jkotas]

more common in C-style libraries is to expose a secondary method that uses an alternative algorithm

Do you have any links? I have never seen multiple memcmp variants exposed for (standard) C.

[GrabYourPitchforks]

I've never seen it for memcmp specifically, but symcrypt follows this pattern in a few places for other APIs. Here's an example of two different wipe (mem clear) routines. They're functionally the same but implemented differently. The caller has the choice of selecting whichever implementation is more optimized for their scenario.

[jkotas]

Yes, I can imagine that niche APIs can use pattern like this, especially when the difference between different approaches is substantial.

I do not think it makes sense to introduce this complexity for common APIs like copying or comparing memory. There is no way people would get their use right.

I have my fingers crossed that the hardware will eventually put the transistors to good use and introduce memory copy and compare instructions that will be strictly better than any alternative software equivalent.

[Tornhoof]

An alternative route for sequence equals for some of the s.t.j use cases might be the comparison against integer values, as implemented in the asp.net core route matcher or in spanjson. That approach needs codegen though.

[benaadams]

Though note that's with the SequenceEqual being (Benchmark in gist on linked issue)

public bool UseSequenceEqual()
{
    var input = _input;
    return SequenceEqual(
        ref MemoryMarshal.GetArrayDataReference(input), 
        ref MemoryMarshal.GetArrayDataReference(_expected), 
        (nuint)input.Length);
}

Rather than creating two Spans as part of it, and linear being behind a call (so they match)

[Benchmark(Baseline = true)]
public bool UseLinearSearch()
{
    return LinearSearch(_input, _expected);
}

[benaadams]

Think I've got it; only worse on 2 and 3 #32371

|           Method | Length |     Mean |     Error |    StdDev | Ratio | RatioSD |
|----------------- |------- |---------:|----------:|----------:|------:|--------:|
|  UseLinearSearch |      0 | 1.301 ns | 0.0172 ns | 0.0161 ns |  1.00 |    0.00 |
| UseSequenceEqual |      0 | 1.383 ns | 0.0215 ns | 0.0201 ns |  1.06 |    0.03 |
|                  |        |          |           |           |       |         |
|  UseLinearSearch |      1 | 1.035 ns | 0.0255 ns | 0.0239 ns |  1.00 |    0.00 |
| UseSequenceEqual |      1 | 1.610 ns | 0.0147 ns | 0.0123 ns |  1.55 |    0.04 |
|                  |        |          |           |           |       |         |
|  UseLinearSearch |      2 | 1.552 ns | 0.0198 ns | 0.0185 ns |  1.00 |    0.00 |
| UseSequenceEqual |      2 | 2.718 ns | 0.0359 ns | 0.0336 ns |  1.75 |    0.03 |
|                  |        |          |           |           |       |         |
|  UseLinearSearch |      3 | 2.163 ns | 0.0328 ns | 0.0291 ns |  1.00 |    0.00 |
| UseSequenceEqual |      3 | 2.805 ns | 0.0133 ns | 0.0125 ns |  1.30 |    0.02 |
|                  |        |          |           |           |       |         |
|  UseLinearSearch |      4 | 2.398 ns | 0.0322 ns | 0.0301 ns |  1.00 |    0.00 |
| UseSequenceEqual |      4 | 1.879 ns | 0.0253 ns | 0.0237 ns |  0.78 |    0.02 |
|                  |        |          |           |           |       |         |
|  UseLinearSearch |      5 | 3.074 ns | 0.0543 ns | 0.0508 ns |  1.00 |    0.00 |
| UseSequenceEqual |      5 | 1.925 ns | 0.0292 ns | 0.0273 ns |  0.63 |    0.02 |
|                  |        |          |           |           |       |         |
|  UseLinearSearch |      6 | 3.776 ns | 0.0465 ns | 0.0435 ns |  1.00 |    0.00 |
| UseSequenceEqual |      6 | 1.929 ns | 0.0309 ns | 0.0274 ns |  0.51 |    0.01 |
|                  |        |          |           |           |       |         |
|  UseLinearSearch |      7 | 4.052 ns | 0.0165 ns | 0.0146 ns |  1.00 |    0.00 |
| UseSequenceEqual |      7 | 1.918 ns | 0.0271 ns | 0.0254 ns |  0.47 |    0.01 |
|                  |        |          |           |           |       |         |
|  UseLinearSearch |      8 | 4.770 ns | 0.0384 ns | 0.0321 ns |  1.00 |    0.00 |
| UseSequenceEqual |      8 | 2.389 ns | 0.0284 ns | 0.0266 ns |  0.50 |    0.01 |
|                  |        |          |           |           |       |         |
|  UseLinearSearch |      9 | 5.250 ns | 0.0888 ns | 0.0831 ns |  1.00 |    0.00 |
| UseSequenceEqual |      9 | 2.098 ns | 0.0113 ns | 0.0094 ns |  0.40 |    0.01 |
|                  |        |          |           |           |       |         |
|  UseLinearSearch |     10 | 5.276 ns | 0.0496 ns | 0.0464 ns |  1.00 |    0.00 |
| UseSequenceEqual |     10 | 2.110 ns | 0.0041 ns | 0.0036 ns |  0.40 |    0.00 |
|                  |        |          |           |           |       |         |
|  UseLinearSearch |     11 | 6.386 ns | 0.0157 ns | 0.0147 ns |  1.00 |    0.00 |
| UseSequenceEqual |     11 | 2.168 ns | 0.0037 ns | 0.0034 ns |  0.34 |    0.00 |
|                  |        |          |           |           |       |         |
|  UseLinearSearch |     12 | 6.900 ns | 0.0106 ns | 0.0100 ns |  1.00 |    0.00 |
| UseSequenceEqual |     12 | 2.174 ns | 0.0066 ns | 0.0052 ns |  0.32 |    0.00 |
|                  |        |          |           |           |       |         |
|  UseLinearSearch |     13 | 7.413 ns | 0.0107 ns | 0.0100 ns |  1.00 |    0.00 |
| UseSequenceEqual |     13 | 2.135 ns | 0.0022 ns | 0.0019 ns |  0.29 |    0.00 |
|                  |        |          |           |           |       |         |
|  UseLinearSearch |     14 | 7.338 ns | 0.0056 ns | 0.0052 ns |  1.00 |    0.00 |
| UseSequenceEqual |     14 | 2.136 ns | 0.0102 ns | 0.0090 ns |  0.29 |    0.00 |
|                  |        |          |           |           |       |         |
|  UseLinearSearch |     15 | 8.414 ns | 0.0535 ns | 0.0474 ns |  1.00 |    0.00 |
| UseSequenceEqual |     15 | 2.121 ns | 0.0199 ns | 0.0166 ns |  0.25 |    0.00 |
|                  |        |          |           |           |       |         |
|  UseLinearSearch |     16 | 8.348 ns | 0.0353 ns | 0.0313 ns |  1.00 |    0.00 |
| UseSequenceEqual |     16 | 2.953 ns | 0.0066 ns | 0.0059 ns |  0.35 |    0.00 |

[ahsonkhan]

An alternative route for sequence equals for some of the s.t.j use cases might be the comparison against integer values, as implemented in the asp.net core route matcher or in spanjson. That approach needs codegen though.

@Tornhoof - can you share links to the example pattern?

[jkotas]

comparison against integer values

E.g. @stephentoub used it for RegEx in #1654 .

It is pretty standard for high-performance codegened parsers/formatters. Some of the Json libraries that are beating System.Text.Json on performance use it as well.

[Tornhoof]

@Tornhoof - can you share links to the example pattern?

@ahsonkhan
From the Dev Phase of spanjson:
https://github.com/Tornhoof/SpanJson/wiki/Technology-and-Internals#3-comparison-against-integers

aspnetcore for Routing:
https://github.com/dotnet/aspnetcore/blob/master/src/Http/Routing/src/Matching/ILEmitTrieFactory.cs