Use jl_filename/jl_lineno less #53799
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
This seems to reduce the surface area quite a bit at least so LGTM |
I don't like `jl_filename`/`jl_lineno`. They are weird internal state, and they are also not thread safe, so if different threads are evaling different things at the same time, line numbers can get confused. This PR changes the core function `jl_toplevel_eval_flex` to keep track of its current file/line context on the stack, so at least there is no confusion within one call to this function. With this PR and #53797, the global `jl_filename`/`jl_lineno` are used for three purposes: 1. To initialize the filename/lineno used by lowering from `Core.eval`. 2. To give binding deprecation warnings. 3. For `jl_critical_error`. 4. By humans in the debugger. I think 3 and 4 are fine, they are exceptional cases. Case 2, I think could be changed to plumb through locations explicitly, but it's a bit annoying, so I didn't tackle it here. Case 1, I think can probably just be changed to consistently initialize, and if you want a proper line number, you need to put it in there explicitly. However, I didn't change that in this PR, because I think it could be slightly breaking, so should be pkgeval'd.
vtjnash
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 4, 2024
- simplify float.jl loop not to call functions just defined to get back the value just stored there - add method to the correct checkbounds function (instead of a local) - missing world push/pop around jl_interpret_toplevel_thunk after #56509 - jl_lineno use maybe missed in #53799 - add some debugging dump for scm_to_julia_ mistakes
vtjnash
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 4, 2024
- simplify float.jl loop not to call functions just defined to get back the value just stored there - add method to the correct checkbounds function (instead of a local) - missing world push/pop around jl_interpret_toplevel_thunk after #56509 - jl_lineno use maybe missed in #53799 - add some debugging dump for scm_to_julia_ mistakes
vtjnash
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 9, 2024
While doing some work on analyzing what code runs at toplevel, I found a few things to simplify or fix: - simplify float.jl loop not to call functions just defined to get back the value just stored there - add method to the correct checkbounds function (instead of a local) - missing world push/pop around jl_interpret_toplevel_thunk after #56509 - jl_lineno use maybe missed in #53799 - add some debugging dump for scm_to_julia_ mistakes
stevengj
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 2, 2025
While doing some work on analyzing what code runs at toplevel, I found a few things to simplify or fix: - simplify float.jl loop not to call functions just defined to get back the value just stored there - add method to the correct checkbounds function (instead of a local) - missing world push/pop around jl_interpret_toplevel_thunk after #56509 - jl_lineno use maybe missed in #53799 - add some debugging dump for scm_to_julia_ mistakes
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I don't like
jl_filename/jl_lineno. They are weird internal state, and they are also not thread safe, so if different threads are evaling different things at the same time, line numbers can get confused.This PR changes the core function
jl_toplevel_eval_flexto keep track of its current file/line context on the stack, so at least there is no confusion within one call to this function.With this PR and #53797, the global
jl_filename/jl_linenoare used for three purposes:Core.eval.jl_critical_error.I think 3 and 4 are fine, they are exceptional cases. Case 2, I think could be changed to plumb through locations explicitly,
but it's a bit annoying, so I didn't tackle it here.
Case 1, I think can probably just be changed to consistently initialize,
and if you want a proper line number, you need to put it in there explicitly.
However, I didn't change that in this PR, because I think it could be slightly
breaking, so should be pkgeval'd.