Hello,
I've been playing with a new approach to reference counting, in
particular for the containers library.
A small prototype is at http://pastebin.com/WnSQY1Jw. The prototype
features a simple doubly-linked list implementation DListImpl. That is
not supposed to be manipulated directly (o
On 2011-12-26 17:25:10 +, Andrei Alexandrescu
said:
Hello,
I've been playing with a new approach to reference counting, in
particular for the containers library.
A small prototype is at http://pastebin.com/WnSQY1Jw. The prototype
features a simple doubly-linked list implementation DL
On 12/26/11 12:46 PM, Michel Fortin wrote:
Although I am a little concerned by this
small but important implementation detail:
Your RefCounted destructor is racy.
Just like other reference counted things in Phobos, if you somehow store
a reference on the GC heap (as a class member for instance)
On Monday, 26 December 2011 at 17:25:12 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Hello,
I've been playing with a new approach to reference counting, in
particular for the containers library.
A small prototype is at http://pastebin.com/WnSQY1Jw. The
prototype features a simple doubly-linked list impl
On 26/12/11 5:25 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
(a) All interaction with the held object is done via opDispatch. In fact
opDispatch can be engineered to statically enforce no reference to the
held object escapes.
I have a separate, but very much related concern:
If the held object has a method
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 17:09:02 -0800, Peter Alexander
wrote:
On 26/12/11 5:25 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
(a) All interaction with the held object is done via opDispatch. In fact
opDispatch can be engineered to statically enforce no reference to the
held object escapes.
I have a separate,
On 27/12/11 1:09 AM, Peter Alexander wrote:
On 26/12/11 5:25 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
(a) All interaction with the held object is done via opDispatch. In fact
opDispatch can be engineered to statically enforce no reference to the
held object escapes.
I have a separate, but very much rela
On 27/12/11 1:14 AM, Robert Jacques wrote:
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 17:09:02 -0800, Peter Alexander
If the held object has a method with the same name as RefCounted (e.g.
asConst) then how do you call the held object's method instead of
RefCounted's method?
You, can't. Looking at the source code as
On 12/26/11 7:09 PM, Peter Alexander wrote:
On 26/12/11 5:25 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
(a) All interaction with the held object is done via opDispatch. In fact
opDispatch can be engineered to statically enforce no reference to the
held object escapes.
I have a separate, but very much rela
On 12/26/11 7:14 PM, Robert Jacques wrote:
There are several uses for opDispatch. For example, vector swizzling is
an example of using opDispatch to replace a finite set of related
functions. General forwarding, like alias this, requires a minimalistic
design: the public interface should be as sm
On 12/26/11 7:25 PM, Peter Alexander wrote:
Following up to this, how do I access non-function members of the held
object? e.g.
struct Foo
{
int x = 1;
}
void main()
{
RefCounted!Foo f;
writeln(f.x); // Doesn't work
}
We can easily have opDispatch look at field names. But I think it's poor
d
On 12/27/11, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> We can easily have opDispatch look at field names. But I think it's poor
> design to expose bald data anyway.
opDispatch doesn't work with property functions, or opBinary, or
opOpAssign. And what about the ctor? I can't call the ctor with your
RefCounted.
On 27/12/11 1:29 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
We can easily have opDispatch look at field names. But I think it's poor
design to expose bald data anyway.
I disagree, especially with immutable structs. There's no point wrapping
immutable data in functions or properties.
Also, what about t
On 12/26/11 11:25 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
[snip]
Destroy.
Walter indeed just destroyed me over the phone: I conflated reference
counting with copy-on-write. Essentially instead of defining a reference
type that's garbage-collected, I defined a value type that has cow.
Which is not ba
On 12/26/11 7:49 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
On 12/27/11, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
We can easily have opDispatch look at field names. But I think it's poor
design to expose bald data anyway.
opDispatch doesn't work with property functions,
It actually does, as per the unittests. Even if it
On 12/26/11 8:23 PM, Peter Alexander wrote:
On 27/12/11 1:29 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
We can easily have opDispatch look at field names. But I think it's poor
design to expose bald data anyway.
I disagree, especially with immutable structs. There's no point wrapping
immutable data in fun
On 2011-12-27 02:47:50 +, Andrei Alexandrescu
said:
On 12/26/11 11:25 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
[snip]
Destroy.
Walter indeed just destroyed me over the phone: I conflated reference
counting with copy-on-write. Essentially instead of defining a
reference type that's garbage-colle
On 12/27/11, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> It actually does, as per the unittests. Even if it currently does by
> @property being too lax, it should continue to work.
It actually doesn't:
struct FooImpl
{
int _x;
@property int x() { return _x; }
@property void x(int val) { _x = val; }
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 17:30:54 -0800, Peter Alexander
wrote:
On 27/12/11 1:14 AM, Robert Jacques wrote:
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 17:09:02 -0800, Peter Alexander
If the held object has a method with the same name as RefCounted (e.g.
asConst) then how do you call the held object's method instead of
R
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 19:00:57 -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 12/26/11 7:49 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
On 12/27/11, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
We can easily have opDispatch look at field names. But I think it's poor
design to expose bald data anyway.
opDispatch doesn't work with prope
On Tue, 27 Dec 2011 03:47:50 +0100, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 12/26/11 11:25 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
[snip]
Destroy.
Walter indeed just destroyed me over the phone: I conflated reference
counting with copy-on-write. Essentially instead of defining a reference
type that's gar
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 18:25:10 +0100, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Hello,
I've been playing with a new approach to reference counting, in
particular for the containers library.
A small prototype is at http://pastebin.com/WnSQY1Jw. The prototype
features a simple doubly-linked list impleme
When I go to that link it just says
Unknown Paste ID!
Don't see any code anywhere.. hum
What is wrong with value containers? They work great in C++, a
container is such a basic thing that ref counting and whatnot is
rarely if ever needed, and in the unlikely event you need to
share a co
On 12/27/11 5:43 AM, deadalnix wrote:
BTW, the plan is to have the same thread that constructed objects to
call their destructors; each thread would have a worklist of garbage
objects to destroy. The list can be reduced during calls to allocation
functions within each thread, and of course when t
On 12/27/11 12:08 AM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
On 12/27/11, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
It actually does, as per the unittests. Even if it currently does by
@property being too lax, it should continue to work.
It actually doesn't:
struct FooImpl
{
int _x;
@property int x() { return _x
Le 26/12/2011 18:25, Andrei Alexandrescu a écrit :
Hello,
I've been playing with a new approach to reference counting, in
particular for the containers library.
A small prototype is at http://pastebin.com/WnSQY1Jw. The prototype
features a simple doubly-linked list implementation DListImpl. Th
On 12/27/11 6:15 AM, Froglegs wrote:
When I go to that link it just says
Unknown Paste ID!
Don't see any code anywhere.. hum
What is wrong with value containers? They work great in C++, a container
is such a basic thing that ref counting and whatnot is rarely if ever
needed, and in the unli
On 12/27/11 8:21 AM, Michel Fortin wrote:
On 2011-12-27 02:47:50 +, Andrei Alexandrescu
1. "Basic" containers - reference semantics, using classic garbage
collection
2. Reference counted containers - still reference semantics, using
reference counting
3. COW containers - value semantics, u
On Tuesday, December 27, 2011 12:32:01 deadalnix wrote:
> The first thing that I see looking at the source code is how many null
> check you'll find in RefCounted . As the RefCounted struct is useless
> without a payload, we should ensure that the payload exists, in all
> cases, and not null check
On 12/27/11 2:24 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Monday, December 26, 2011 20:47:50 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
1. "Basic" containers - reference semantics, using classic garbage
collection
2. Reference counted containers - still reference semantics, using
reference counting
3. COW containers -
On 12/27/11 5:27 AM, kenji hara wrote:
I've already posted a dmd patch to fix all of opDispatch problems:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/280
As far a I understand you pass the whole template as a string inside
opDispatch? For example, say obj defines opDispatch:
obj.foo!
On 12/27/11 5:32 AM, deadalnix wrote:
The first thing that I see looking at the source code is how many null
check you'll find in RefCounted . As the RefCounted struct is useless
without a payload, we should ensure that the payload exists, in all
cases, and not null check at every operation.
D'
Le 26/12/2011 20:49, Andrei Alexandrescu a écrit :
On 12/26/11 12:46 PM, Michel Fortin wrote:
Although I am a little concerned by this
small but important implementation detail:
Your RefCounted destructor is racy.
Just like other reference counted things in Phobos, if you somehow store
a refer
On 12/27/11 9:27 AM, Michel Fortin wrote:
On 2011-12-27 14:57:18 +, Andrei Alexandrescu
said:
I talked a lot about this with Walter and we concluded that the story
with const and immutable goes like this: in a RefCounted!T object, the
T is constant, not the RefCounted. So it would be
RefCou
On 12/27/11 4:32 AM, Peter Alexander wrote:
On 27/12/11 3:05 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 12/26/11 8:23 PM, Peter Alexander wrote:
I am
not convinced that it can be used seamlessly without some relatively
large changes to the language.
I repeat that opDispatch and auto ref were invented
Le 27/12/2011 16:09, Andrei Alexandrescu a écrit :
On 12/27/11 5:27 AM, kenji hara wrote:
I've already posted a dmd patch to fix all of opDispatch problems:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/280
As far a I understand you pass the whole template as a string inside
opDispatch?
Le 27/12/2011 16:06, Andrei Alexandrescu a écrit :
On 12/27/11 5:43 AM, deadalnix wrote:
BTW, the plan is to have the same thread that constructed objects to
call their destructors; each thread would have a worklist of garbage
objects to destroy. The list can be reduced during calls to allocatio
Le 27/12/2011 16:04, Andrei Alexandrescu a écrit :
On 12/27/11 5:32 AM, deadalnix wrote:
The first thing that I see looking at the source code is how many null
check you'll find in RefCounted . As the RefCounted struct is useless
without a payload, we should ensure that the payload exists, in al
On 27/12/11 4:32 PM, deadalnix wrote:
Le 27/12/2011 16:09, Andrei Alexandrescu a écrit :
On 12/27/11 5:27 AM, kenji hara wrote:
I've already posted a dmd patch to fix all of opDispatch problems:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/280
As far a I understand you pass the whole t
ProxyOf rewrites the expression
> obj.foo!(bar, baz)(a, b);
to
obj.opDispatch!("foo").opDispatch!(bar, baz)(a, b)
// opDispatch!("foo").opDispatch generates a temporary member template
for forwarding.
// And it is actually processed as 'eponymous template'.
Thanks.
Kenji Hara
2011/12/28 Andrei
On 12/27/11 9:34 AM, Peter Alexander wrote:
I don't believe this will work in general when the template parameter
passed in requires name look-up in the local scope.
struct Foo
{
int bar(alias f)() { return f(); }
}
void main()
{
static int fun() { return 1; }
RefCounted!Foo foo;
writeln(foo.
On 2011-12-27 14:57:18 +, Andrei Alexandrescu
said:
On 12/27/11 8:21 AM, Michel Fortin wrote:
On 2011-12-27 02:47:50 +, Andrei Alexandrescu
1. "Basic" containers - reference semantics, using classic garbage
collection
2. Reference counted containers - still reference semantics, usin
Le 27/12/2011 08:00, Robert Jacques a écrit :
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 17:30:54 -0800, Peter Alexander
wrote:
On 27/12/11 1:14 AM, Robert Jacques wrote:
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 17:09:02 -0800, Peter Alexander
If the held object has a method with the same name as RefCounted (e.g.
asConst) then how do
On 27/12/11 3:05 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 12/26/11 8:23 PM, Peter Alexander wrote:
I am
not convinced that it can be used seamlessly without some relatively
large changes to the language.
I repeat that opDispatch and auto ref were invented for this, so
anything that doesn't work now i
On Monday, December 26, 2011 20:47:50 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 12/26/11 11:25 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> [snip]
>
> > Destroy.
>
> Walter indeed just destroyed me over the phone: I conflated reference
> counting with copy-on-write. Essentially instead of defining a reference
> type t
When I tried implementation of Unique which was not usable at all
though it was listed in a document, I faced a similar problem.
The patch of Kenji is intended to just solve this.
Even if these patch applied, some problems are left. (e.g.
Automatic definitions of the opEquals function for Object
On 27/12/11 3:10 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 12/27/11 4:32 AM, Peter Alexander wrote:
On 27/12/11 3:05 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 12/26/11 8:23 PM, Peter Alexander wrote:
I am
not convinced that it can be used seamlessly without some relatively
large changes to the language.
I r
On 27/12/11 12:15 PM, Froglegs wrote:
What is wrong with value containers? They work great in C++, a container
is such a basic thing that ref counting and whatnot is rarely if ever
needed, and in the unlikely event you need to share a container,
wrapping it with a smart pointer of some sort is ea
Am 27.12.2011 02:14, schrieb Robert Jacques:
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 17:09:02 -0800, Peter Alexander
wrote:
On 26/12/11 5:25 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
(a) All interaction with the held object is done via opDispatch. In fact
opDispatch can be engineered to statically enforce no reference to t
I've already posted a dmd patch to fix all of opDispatch problems:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/280
With it, I've posted a useful library utility to implement
'super-type' like D1 typedef:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/300
I'm naming it 'ProxyOf', a
On 2011-12-27 02:47:50 +, Andrei Alexandrescu
said:
The perspectives here are extremely exciting. The question remains how
to best package this awesome array of options to maximize coherence. So
we have:
1. "Basic" containers - reference semantics, using classic garbage collection
2. R
Le 27/12/2011 18:03, Peter Alexander a écrit :
On 27/12/11 4:32 PM, deadalnix wrote:
Le 27/12/2011 16:09, Andrei Alexandrescu a écrit :
On 12/27/11 5:27 AM, kenji hara wrote:
I've already posted a dmd patch to fix all of opDispatch problems:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/
On 2011-12-27 02:09, Peter Alexander wrote:
On 26/12/11 5:25 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
(a) All interaction with the held object is done via opDispatch. In fact
opDispatch can be engineered to statically enforce no reference to the
held object escapes.
I have a separate, but very much rela
On 2011-12-27 02:30, Peter Alexander wrote:
On 27/12/11 1:14 AM, Robert Jacques wrote:
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 17:09:02 -0800, Peter Alexander
If the held object has a method with the same name as RefCounted (e.g.
asConst) then how do you call the held object's method instead of
RefCounted's method
On 2011-12-27 15:48:56 +, Andrei Alexandrescu
said:
On 12/27/11 9:27 AM, Michel Fortin wrote:
It can't be a library feature because it requires the compiler to
implicitly add a "ref" to functions parameters when they are of a "ref
struct" type. That's pretty much all it does: add a flag
On Tue, 27 Dec 2011 07:10:14 -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 12/27/11 4:32 AM, Peter Alexander wrote:
On 27/12/11 3:05 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 12/26/11 8:23 PM, Peter Alexander wrote:
I am
not convinced that it can be used seamlessly without some relatively
large changes to t
On 12/28/11 12:59 AM, Robert Jacques wrote:
I would have thought that the template parameters would be passed to
opDispatch i.e.
obj.opDispatch!("foo",bar,baz)(a,b);
although I don't know how opDispatch would be written to handle such a
call in a generic manner, i.e. I would want to define it a
"Peter Alexander" wrote in message
news:jdct6a$2230$1...@digitalmars.com...
> How would that work? opDispatch already has variadic templates for the
> normal function parameters. Make opDispatch a template inside a template?
I suppose that's what this is for.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_
Is work ongoing on this container prototype? Sounds quite
interesting...
59 matches
Mail list logo
