<< Back to previous view

[CLJ-803] IAtom interface Created: 27/May/11  Updated: 07/Oct/14  Resolved: 07/Oct/14

Status: Closed
Project: Clojure
Component/s: None
Affects Version/s: Release 1.6
Fix Version/s: Release 1.7

Type: Enhancement Priority: Minor
Reporter: Pepijn de Vos Assignee: Unassigned
Resolution: Completed Votes: 4
Labels: atom

Attachments: Text File 0001-atom-interface.patch     Text File iatom.patch    
Patch: Code
Approval: Ok

 Description   

Atom does not have an interface and is marked final. This patch extracts an IAtom interface and has Atom implement it.

Patch: 0001-atom-interface.patch

Screened by: Alex Miller

More info: Rich said "patch welcome for IAtom". See IRC logs: http://clojure-log.n01se.net/date/2010-12-29.html#10:04c



 Comments   
Comment by Stuart Halloway [ 27/May/11 2:33 PM ]

Please add a patch formatted by "git format-patch" so that attribution is included.

Comment by Pepijn de Vos [ 04/Jun/11 5:56 AM ]

I added the formatted patch a few days ago. Does 'no news is good news' apply here?

And, silly question, will it make it into 1.3? I can't figure out how to tell Jira to show me that.

Comment by Kevin Downey [ 04/Jul/11 9:06 PM ]

I fail to see the need for an IAtom, if you want something atom like for couchdb the interfaces are already there. Maybe I ICompareAndSwap. Atoms and couchdb are different so making them appear the same is a bad idea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacies_of_Distributed_Computing

http://clojure.org/state one of the distinctions between agents and actors raised in the section titled "Message Passing and Actors" is local vs. distributed and the same distinction can be made between couchdb (regardless of compare and swap) and atoms

Comment by Aaron Bedra [ 04/Jul/11 9:18 PM ]

This ticket has already been moved into approved backlog. It will be revisited again after the 1.3 release where we will take a closer look at things. For now, this will remain as is.

Comment by Aaron Craelius [ 10/Jul/14 12:15 PM ]

Any chance this patch could get implemented in an upcoming Clojure release. There is still continued interest, see this thread: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/clojure-dev/y5QoMqd44Lc

One suggestion I would make is also removing the final marker from clojure.lang.Atom - I can see use cases where one would want to directly subclass Atom (to capture dependencies in reactive computations for instance).

Comment by Brandon Bloom [ 02/Aug/14 2:14 PM ]

I'd like to see an IAtom interface, but would prefer that `swap` not be part of it. Swapping can, and should, be defined in terms of `compareAndSet`. Seems like IAtom should only have `boolean compareAndSet(object oldval, object newval)` as well as `void reset(object newval)`.

Comment by Brandon Bloom [ 02/Aug/14 2:29 PM ]

Alternative patch that introduces IAtom and converts swap to be static.

Comment by Pepijn de Vos [ 03/Aug/14 2:59 AM ]

At the time I did the initial patch, I had the same idea to remove swap, but Rich said there where cases for having it, so it should stay in according to him.

Comment by Aaron Craelius [ 03/Aug/14 1:51 PM ]

One use case I can think of for overriding swap is if an IAtom is wrapping say a row of data stored in a database. Then comparing something like a version column (or transaction id in the case of datomic) is what should determine whether a swap is retried, not the actual value of the data. In this case then, compareAndSet would actually be a more complex operation than swap and it makes sense to define the two independently.

Comment by Aaron Craelius [ 03/Aug/14 1:56 PM ]

I should also mention my related issue: http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-1470 which simply allows Atom (and also ARef) to be sub-classed. Both patches could ultimately work together to make the whole Atom/ARef infrastructure easier to extend.

Comment by Alex Miller [ 10/Sep/14 4:47 PM ]

This ticket needs some work before it can be screened:

  • description can lose the the Couch stuff
  • needs some mention of tradeoffs for the various swap alternatives
  • don't know what patch should be considered
Comment by Brandon Bloom [ 10/Sep/14 5:01 PM ]

I removed my patch because Pepijn/Rich is right: Swap should be part of the interface.

Generated at Thu Dec 18 22:45:06 CST 2014 using JIRA 4.4#649-r158309.