X10

Restrict implicit 'this' in at body

Details

  • Type: Bug Bug
  • Status: Open Open
  • Priority: Critical Critical
  • Resolution: Unresolved
  • Affects Version/s: X10 SVN HEAD
  • Fix Version/s: X10 2.3.2
  • Component/s: Language Design
  • Labels:
    None
  • Number of attachments :
    0

Description

I recently accidently captured 'this' while using a field inside an at block without realising that it was a field and not just a local variable in scope. This can really cripple performance and take a while to track down.

Given that we don't have tools to help with this problem, and it is a very easy mistake to make, why don't we just force programmers to capture 'this' explicitly in the rare case that this what they want? It would make it much easier to approximate the cost of an 'at' by reading code.

The extra strictness could be disabled with an annotation on the 'at' if desired.

Issue Links

is depended upon by

Task - A task that needs to be done. XTENLANG-2971 Umbrella language/front-end JIRA for X10 2.3.1

  • Critical - Crashes, loss of data, severe memory leak.
  • Open - The issue is open and ready for the assignee to start work on it.
relates to

Bug - A problem which impairs or prevents the functions of the product. XTENLANG-2466 Capturing a field (instead of capturing the entire container): implication on "this" escaping

  • Critical - Crashes, loss of data, severe memory leak.
  • Open - The issue is open and ready for the assignee to start work on it.

Improvement - An improvement or enhancement to an existing feature or task. XTENLANG-1913 Copying semantics: copying 'at' should not copy 'this'

  • Critical - Crashes, loss of data, severe memory leak.
  • Reopened - This issue was once resolved, but the resolution was deemed incorrect. From here issues are either marked assigned or resolved.

Activity

Ascending order - Click to sort in descending order
Hide
Permalink
Dave Cunningham added a comment -

Bard points out that this problem may be greatly reduced by extended 'at' syntax proposed for 2.3

Show
Dave Cunningham added a comment - Bard points out that this problem may be greatly reduced by extended 'at' syntax proposed for 2.3
Hide
Permalink
David Grove added a comment -

Vijay, this could be deferred to 2.3 without harm, but it might be nice to get into 2.2.1 if we can.

Show
David Grove added a comment - Vijay, this could be deferred to 2.3 without harm, but it might be nice to get into 2.2.1 if we can.
Hide
Permalink
David Grove added a comment -

bulk defer of open issues to 2.2.2.

Show
David Grove added a comment - bulk defer of open issues to 2.2.2.
Hide
Permalink
David Grove added a comment -

bulk defer of issues to 2.2.3.

Show
David Grove added a comment - bulk defer of issues to 2.2.3.
Hide
Permalink
David Grove added a comment -

bulk defer of 2.3.0 open issues to 2.3.1.

Show
David Grove added a comment - bulk defer of 2.3.0 open issues to 2.3.1.
Hide
Permalink
David Grove added a comment -

bulk defer to 2.3.2

Show
David Grove added a comment - bulk defer to 2.3.2

People

  • Assignee:
    Vijay Saraswat
    Reporter:
    Dave Cunningham
Vote (0)
Watch (1)

Dates

  • Created:
    Updated: