[Pharo-dev] [Vm-dev] Re: [ANN] Ephemeron Support is Ready

[Yuriy Tymchuk]

Maybe I will find some time to hack the tree-matching rules to highlight the matched piece of code. It’s so frustrating that they don’t do it…

Uko

> On 30 Jun 2016, at 10:17, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker at inria.fr> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> finalizationProcess 
>     "The finalization process arranges to send mourn to each element of the VM's finalization queue, 
>      which is accessed via primitiveFetchMourner.  The VM signals FinalizationSemaphore whenever 
>      the queue is non-empty.  This process loops, waiting on the semaphore, fetches the first element 
>      of the queue and then spawns a process at a higher priority to acually send the mourn messages. 
>      If an error occurs in the higher priority mourn loop process then this process will simply spawn 
>      another process, hence ensuring that errors in finalization methods don't break finalization. 
>  
>      In addition this process also runs the old finalization scheme, supporting clients of the older, 
>      WeakRegistry based scheme.  Hopefully this will go away when all cleints have moved over." 
>     | throttle firstMourner | 
>     throttle := Semaphore new. 
>     [FinalizationSemaphore wait; initSignals. 
>      "Support the old scheme until things have changed over..." 
>      self doOldFinalization. 
>      [firstMourner := self primitiveFetchMourner. 
>       firstMourner notNil] whileTrue: 
>         [[throttle signal. 
>           self mournLoopWith: firstMourner] forkAt: Processor activePriority + 1. 
>          throttle wait]]
> 
> Doh!  So I wrote a naked block, not a loop !! So it did nothing.  Thank you!!  I think the compiler should warn about naked blocks.
> 
> 
> I added a new Code-Critic rule "RBDeadBlockRule", with
> 
> initialize
> 	super initialize.
> 	self matcher 
> 		matches: '`{:node | node isBlock and: [node parent isSequence 
> 			and: [ node isLastStatementInBlock not ]]}'
> 		do: [ :node :answer | node ]
> 
> This now shows a warning in the tools (the explanation is shown when clicking on the ? button):
> It does not yet highlight the block and has no automatic transformation to fix the problem, but as 
> a first step it should be nice to have.
> 
> 
> <Dead.jpg>
> 
> This is in 60 update 126.
> 
> (I did not read the mail again before doing it, so now it is called "dead", not "naked", we can change
> that... dead somehow makes it look to be related a "dead context"...).
> 
>        Marcus
> 
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/vm-dev/attachments/20160630/f587a7ac/attachment.htm