<< Back to previous view

[CLJ-1572] into does not work with IReduceInit Created: 24/Oct/14  Updated: 24/Oct/14

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

Type: Defect Priority: Major
Reporter: Alex Miller Assignee: Unassigned
Resolution: Unresolved Votes: 0
Labels: None

Attachments: Text File clj-1572.patch    
Patch: Code
Approval: Incomplete

 Description   

This should work:

(into []
  (reify clojure.lang.IReduceInit
    (reduce [_ f start]
      (reduce f start (range 10)))))
IllegalArgumentException Don't know how to create ISeq from: user$eval5$reify__6
	clojure.lang.RT.seqFrom (RT.java:506)
	clojure.lang.RT.seq (RT.java:487)
	clojure.core/seq--seq--4091 (core.clj:135)
	clojure.core.protocols/seq-reduce (protocols.clj:30)
	clojure.core.protocols/fn--6422 (protocols.clj:42)
	clojure.core.protocols/fn--6369/f--6255--auto----G--6364--6382 (protocols.clj:13)
	clojure.core/reduce (core.clj:6469)
	clojure.core/into (core.clj:6550)


 Comments   
Comment by Alex Miller [ 24/Oct/14 10:40 AM ]

into calls reduce which calls into CollReduce. CollReduce extends to IReduce, but not to IReduceInit. If CollReduce were extended to IReduceInit for the arity it can support, into work as expected in the given example. Patch clj-1572.patch does this.





[CLJ-1554] Need to expand tests to cover transducers Created: 07/Oct/14  Updated: 24/Oct/14

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

Type: Defect Priority: Critical
Reporter: Alex Miller Assignee: Alex Miller
Resolution: Unresolved Votes: 0
Labels: transducers

Attachments: Text File clj-1554-2.patch     Text File clj-1554-3.patch     Text File clj-1554.patch    
Patch: Code and Test
Approval: Vetted

 Description   

Attached patch contains both some generative and example tests for transducers. The generative tests build a series of sequence functions (take 5, filter odd?, etc) and apply them to a random vector of numbers as seq transformations, sequence of transducer, into of transducer, and transduce of transducer. The results are compared.

Note: these tests depend on the patch in CLJ-1349 to run as tests.

Patch: clj-1554-3.patch



 Comments   
Comment by Fogus [ 24/Oct/14 1:44 PM ]

I downloaded and applied this patch and its dependent patch (1349) and ran the tests. The coverage is a good start and the approach of verifying results against results gathered from other approaches is important. One note of style is that the use of `doall` is inconsistent in the `apply-as-*` functions. i would recommend that at least one other person screen this patch as my grasp of test.check is tenuous.

Comment by Alex Miller [ 24/Oct/14 2:52 PM ]

Updated patch slightly to clean up the doall stuff.





[CLJ-1546] Widen vec to take Iterable/IReduce Created: 02/Oct/14  Updated: 24/Oct/14

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

Type: Enhancement Priority: Critical
Reporter: Alex Miller Assignee: Unassigned
Resolution: Unresolved Votes: 0
Labels: None

Attachments: Text File clj-1546-2.patch     Text File clj-1546-3.patch     Text File clj-1546.patch    
Patch: Code and Test
Approval: Vetted

 Description   

These examples should work but does not:

Something Iterable but not IReduce:

user> (def i (eduction (map inc) (range 100)))
#'user/i
user> (instance? java.util.Collection i)
false
user> (instance? Iterable i)
true
user> (vec i)
RuntimeException Unable to convert: class clojure.core.Iteration to Object[]

Something IReduceInit but not Iterable:

user=> (vec
  (reify clojure.lang.IReduceInit
    (reduce [_ f start]
      (reduce f start (range 10)))))
RuntimeException Unable to convert: class user$reify__15 to Object[]

Proposal: Add PersistentVector.create(Iterable) and PersistentVector.create(IReduceInit) to efficiently create PVs from those. Add a number of cases to vec to support different cases.

Patch: clj-1546-3.patch

Screened by:



 Comments   
Comment by Timothy Baldridge [ 02/Oct/14 9:44 AM ]

Is there a reason the final case for (vec something) can't just be a call to (into [] coll)? It seems a bit odd to do (to-array) on anything thats not a java collection or Iterable, when we have IReduce.

Comment by Rich Hickey [ 02/Oct/14 10:02 AM ]

re: Tim - yes, this needs to support IReduce (and thereby educe) as well

Comment by Alex Miller [ 14/Oct/14 9:56 AM ]

Added new patch that handles Iterable and IReduceInit in vec. It also makes calling with a vector much faster due to the first check. into is still faster for chunked seqs (due to special InternalReduce handling of chunking).

It would be possible to move more of the variant checking into LazilyPersistentVector or PersistentVector so it could be used in more contexts. I'm not sure how much to do with that.

It would also be possible to instead lean on reduce more from the Java side if there was a Java version of reduce (as defined in mikera's branch for http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-1192 at https://github.com/mikera/clojure/compare/clj-1192-vec-performance. Something like that is the only way I can see of leveraging that same InternalReduce logic that makes into faster than vec.





[CLJ-1529] Significantly improve compile time by reducing calls to Class.forName Created: 21/Sep/14  Updated: 27/Oct/14

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

Type: Enhancement Priority: Critical
Reporter: Zach Tellman Assignee: Unassigned
Resolution: Unresolved Votes: 28
Labels: compiler, performance

Attachments: File class-for-name.diff     File clj-1529-no-cache.diff     PNG File clj-1529.png     File clj-1529-with-cache.diff     Text File maybe-class-cache-2.patch     Text File maybe-class-cache.patch    
Patch: Code
Approval: Vetted

 Description   

Compilation speed has been a real problem for a number of my projects, especially Aleph [1], which in 1.6 takes 18 seconds to load. Recently I realized that Class.forName is being called repeatedly on symbols which are lexically bound. Hits on Class.forName are cached, but misses are allowed to go through each time, which translates into tens of thousands of calls after calling `(use 'aleph.http)`.

This patch improves compilation time from 18 seconds to 7 seconds. The gain is exaggerated by the number of macros I use, but I would expect at least 50% improvements across a wide variety of codebases.

This patch does introduce a slight semantic change by privileging lexical scope over classnames. Consider this code:

(let [String "foo"]
(. String substring 0 1))

Previously, this would be treated as a static call to 'java.lang.String', but with the patch would be treated as a call to the lexical variable 'String'. Since the new semantic is what I (and I think everyone else) would have expected in the first place, it's probably very likely that no one is shadowing classes with their variable names, since someone would have complained about this. If anyone feels this is at all risky, however, I'm happy to discuss it further.

[1] https://github.com/ztellman/aleph



 Comments   
Comment by Ghadi Shayban [ 21/Sep/14 4:30 PM ]

One of our larger projects (not macro-laden) just went from 36 seconds to 23 seconds to start with this patch.

Comment by Ramsey Nasser [ 03/Oct/14 12:34 PM ]

I ported this patch to Clojure-CLR for the Unity integration project and we have seen significant speedups as well. I too agree that this is the behavior I expect as a user.

Comment by Alex Miller [ 06/Oct/14 12:19 PM ]

I ran this on a variety of open-source projects. I didn't find that it produced any unexpected behavior or test errors. Most projects were about 10% faster to run equivalent of "lein test" with a few as high as 35% faster.

Comment by Alex Miller [ 07/Oct/14 12:52 PM ]

We're interested in comparing this and the class caching in fastload branch to get something in for 1.7. Next step is to extract a patch of the stuff in fastload so we can compare them better.

Comment by Alex Miller [ 07/Oct/14 4:06 PM ]

Add maybe class cache patch from fastload branch

Comment by Alex Miller [ 08/Oct/14 8:57 AM ]

Times below to run "time lein test" on a variety of projects with columns:

  • master = current 1.7.0 master
  • maybe-cache = maybe-class-cache.patch extracted from Rich's fastload branch
  • class-for-name = class-for-name.diff from Zach
  • % maybe-cache = % improvement for maybe-cache over master
  • % class-for-name = % improvement for class-for-name patch over master (sorted desc)

project,master,maybe-cache,class-for-name,% maybe-cache,% class-for-name
aleph,25.605,16.572,14.460,35.278,43.527
riemann,40.550,27.656,24.734,31.798,39.004
lamina,37.247,30.072,29.045,19.263,22.021
trapperkeeper,11.979,11.158,10.3,6.854,14.016
plumbing,73.777,68.388,66.922,7.304,9.292
cheshire,5.583,5.089,5.086,8.848,8.902
tools.analyzer,5.411,5.289,5.023,2.255,7.171
core.async,19.161,18.090,17.942,5.589,6.362
tools.reader,4.686,4.435,4.401,5.356,6.082
clara-rules,43.964,42.140,41.542,4.149,5.509
core.typed,158.885,154.954,151.445,2.474,4.683
instaparse,9.286,8.922,8.859,3.920,4.598
schema,45.3,43.914,43.498,3.060,3.978
mandoline,76.295,74.831,74.425,1.919,2.451

The summary is that both patches improve times on all projects. In most cases, the improvement from either is <10% but the first few projects have greater improvements. The class-for-name patch has a bigger improvement in all projects than the maybe-cache patch (but maybe-cache has no change in semantics).

Comment by Nicola Mometto [ 08/Oct/14 9:03 AM ]

Are the two patches mutually exclusive?

Comment by Alex Miller [ 08/Oct/14 9:35 AM ]

They are non-over-lapping. I have not considered whether they could both be applied or whether that makes any sense.

Comment by Alex Miller [ 08/Oct/14 9:53 AM ]

The two patches both essentially cut off the same hot code path, just at different points (class-for-name is earlier), so applying them both effectively should give you about the performance of class-for-name.

Comment by Alex Miller [ 08/Oct/14 2:14 PM ]

Added a picture of the data for easier consumption.

Comment by Deepak Giridharagopal [ 10/Oct/14 4:35 PM ]

One of our bigger projects saw a reduction of startup time of 16% with class-for-name, 14% with maybe-cache, and a whopping 23% with both patches applied. This was actually starting up the program, as opposed to running "lein test", FWIW.

Maybe it's worth re-running the benchmarks with a "both-patches" variant?

Comment by Alex Miller [ 10/Oct/14 5:28 PM ]

Hey Deepak, I did actually run some of them with both patches and saw times similar to class-for-name.

Were your times consistent across restarts? The times in the data above are the best of 3 trials for every data point (although they were relatively consistent).

Comment by Deepak Giridharagopal [ 10/Oct/14 6:08 PM ]

Hi Alex, the tests I ran did 20-iteration loops, and I took the mean (though it was pretty consistent between restarts). I can redo stuff and upload the raw data for you if that will help.

Comment by Deepak Giridharagopal [ 10/Oct/14 6:43 PM ]

So repeating the experiment several times does in fact behave as you suspected...apologies for my previous LOLDATA.

Comment by Alex Miller [ 24/Oct/14 3:01 PM ]

maybe-class-cache-2.patch removes some debugging stuff

Comment by Alex Miller [ 27/Oct/14 4:41 PM ]

I've done more testing and made mods to both patches and moved them closer together.

On the maybe-class-cache patch (new version = clj-1529-with-cache.diff):
1) I found that adding a final else branch that returned null was an improvement - this avoids caching things that will never hit in the future (Cons, PersistentList, Symbols with namespaces, etc). That's both a perf improvement (avoids hashing those things) and a memory improvement.
2) The tagToClass improvement from Zach's patch is orthogonal and also valid here so I added it.
3) I added Zach's check, but moved the placement lower so that it doesn't alter semantics. It helps avoid caching locals that aren't classes.

On the class-for-name patch (new version = clj-1529-no-cache.diff):
1) Same change as #3 above - moved check lower to avoid semantics change.

With these changes, both patches have tagToClass and local checks, neither patch changes semantics, and the only difference is whether to keep or remove the cache.

aleph timings (for "lein test"):

  • 1.7 master = 25.415 s
  • 1.7 + clj-1529-with-cache.diff = 14.329 s
  • 1.7 + clj-1529-no-cache.diff = 14.808 s

lamina timings (for "lein test"):

  • 1.7 master = 37.340 s
  • 1.7 + clj-1529-with-cache.diff = 28.680 s
  • 1.7 + clj-1529-no-cache.diff = 28.759 s

The cache helps slightly in both cases, but it does not seem worth adding the new dynamic var and unbounded memory use inherent in the cache.





[CLJ-1515] Reify the result of range Created: 29/Aug/14  Updated: 24/Oct/14

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

Type: Enhancement Priority: Major
Reporter: Timothy Baldridge Assignee: Unassigned
Resolution: Unresolved Votes: 1
Labels: None

Attachments: File patch.diff     File range-patch3.diff    
Patch: Code and Test
Approval: Incomplete

 Description   

Currently range simply returns a lazy seq. If the return value of range were reified into a type (as it is in ClojureScript) we could optimize many functions on that resulting type. Some operations such as count and nth become O(1) in this case, while others such as reduce could receive a performance boost do to the reduced number of allocations.

Approach: this patch revives the unused (but previously existing) clojure.lang.Range class. This class acts as a lazy seq and implements several other appropriate interfaces such as Counted and Indexed. This type is implemented in Java since range is needed fairly on in core.clj before deftype is defined. The attached patch uses Numbers.* methods for all math due to the input types to range being unknown. The class also supplies a .iterator() method which allows for allocation free reducing over range.

Note: this code keeps backwards compatibility with the existing range code. This means some parts of the class (mostly relating to a step size of 0) are a bit more complex than desired, but these bits were needed to get all the tests to pass.

Note: this code does not preserve the chunked-seq nature of the original range. The fact that range used to return chunked seqs was not published in the doc strings and so it was removed to allow for simpler code in Range.java.

Performance:
(timings done at the repl run via java -jar)

(dotimes [x 100] (time (dotimes [x 1] (count (range (* 1024 1024))))))
master => 80-110ms
patch => 0.014ms


(dotimes [x 100] (time (dotimes [x 1] (reduce + (map inc (range (* 1024 1024)))))))
master => 76-87ms
patch => 340-360ms


(dotimes [x 100] (time (dotimes [x 1] (reduce + (map inc (map inc (range (* 1024 1024))))))))
master => 97-123ms
patch=> 490-577ms



(dotimes [x 100] (time (dotimes [x 1] (count (filter odd? (range (* 1024 1024)))))))
master => 87-104ms
patch => 370-330ms


(dotimes [x 100] (time (dotimes [x 1] (transduce (comp (map inc) (map inc)) + (range (* 1024 1024))))))
master=>76-116ms
patch => 44ms-59ms

Patch: range-patch3.diff



 Comments   
Comment by Alex Miller [ 29/Aug/14 3:19 PM ]

1) Not sure about losing chunked seqs - that would make older usage slower, which seems undesirable.
2) RangeIterator.next() needs to throw NoSuchElementException when walking off the end
3) I think Range should implement IReduce instead of relying on support for CollReduce via Iterable.
4) Should let _hash and _hasheq auto-initialize to 0 not set to -1. As is, I think _hasheq always would be -1?
5) _hash and _hasheq should be transient.
6) count could be cached (like hash and hasheq). Not sure if it's worth doing that but seems like a win any time it's called more than once.
7) Why the change in test/clojure/test_clojure/serialization.clj ?
8) Can you squash into a single commit?

Comment by Timothy Baldridge [ 29/Aug/14 3:40 PM ]

1) I agree, adding chunked seqs to this will dramatically increase complexity, are we sure we want this?
2) exception added
3) I can add IReduce, but it'll pretty much just duplicate the code in protocols.clj. If we're sure we want that I'll add it too.
4) fixed hash init values, defaults to -1 like ASeq
5) hash fields are now transient
6) at the cost of about 4 bytes we can cache the cost of a multiplication and an addition, doesn't seem worth it?
7) the tests in serialization.clj assert that the type of the collection roundtrips. This is no longer the case for range which starts as Range and ends as a list. The change I made converts range into a list so that it properly roundtrips. My assumption is that we shouldn't rely on all implementations of ISeq to properly roundtrip through EDN.
8) squashed.

Comment by Alex Miller [ 29/Aug/14 3:49 PM ]

6) might be useful if you're walking through it with nth, which hits count everytime, but doubt that's common
7) yep, reasonable

Comment by Andy Fingerhut [ 18/Sep/14 6:52 AM ]

I have already pointed out to Edipo in personal email the guidelines on what labels to use for Clojure JIRA tickets here: http://dev.clojure.org/display/community/Creating+Tickets

Comment by Timothy Baldridge [ 19/Sep/14 10:02 AM ]

New patch with IReduce directly on Range instead of relying on iterators

Comment by Alex Miller [ 01/Oct/14 2:00 PM ]

The new patch looks good. Could you do a test to determine the perf difference from walking the old chunked seq vs the new version? If the perf diff is negligible, I think we can leave as is.

Another idea: would it make sense to have a specialized RangeLong for the (very common) case where start, end, and step could all be primitive longs? Seems like this could help noticeably.

Comment by Timothy Baldridge [ 03/Oct/14 10:00 AM ]

Looks like chunked seqs do make lazy seq code about 5x faster in these tests.

Comment by Ghadi Shayban [ 03/Oct/14 10:22 AM ]

I think penalizing existing code possibly 5x is a hard cost to stomach. Is there another approach where a protocolized range can live outside of core? CLJ-993 has a patch that makes it a reducible source in clojure.core.reducers, but it's coll-reduce not IReduce, and doesn't contain an Iterator. Otherwise we might have to take the chunked seq challenge.

Alex: Re long/float. Old reified Ranged.java in clojure.lang blindly assumes ints, it would be nice to have a long vs. float version, though I believe the contract of reduce boxes numbers. (Unboxed math can be implemented very nicely as in Prismatic's Hiphip array manipulation library, which takes the long vs float specialization to the extreme with different namespaces)

Comment by Timothy Baldridge [ 03/Oct/14 10:38 AM ]

I don't think anyone is suggesting we push unboxed math all the way down through transducers. Instead, this patch contains a lot of calls to Numbers.*, if we were to assume that the start end and step params of range are all Longs, then we could remove all of these calls and only box when returning an Object (in .first) or when calling IFn.invoke (inside .reduce)

Comment by Alex Miller [ 03/Oct/14 10:46 AM ]

I agree that 5x slowdown is too much - I don't think we can give up chunked seqs if that's the penalty.

On the long case, I was suggesting what Tim is talking about, in the case of all longs, create a Range that stores long prims and does prim math, but still return boxed objects as necessary. I think the only case worth optimizing is all longs - the permutation of other options gets out of hand quickly.

Comment by Ghadi Shayban [ 03/Oct/14 11:00 AM ]

Tim, I'm not suggesting unboxed math, but the singular fast-path of all-Longs that you and Alex describe. I mistakenly lower-cased Long/Float.





[CLJ-1501] LazySeq switches to equiv when using equals Created: 11/Aug/14  Updated: 08/Oct/14

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

Type: Defect Priority: Major
Reporter: Jozef Wagner Assignee: Jozef Wagner
Resolution: Unresolved Votes: 0
Labels: collections, ft, interop, seq

Attachments: File clj-1501.diff    
Patch: Code and Test
Approval: Screened

 Description   

When comparing lazy seqs with java equality operator .equals, the implementation switches to the Clojures .equiv comparison. This switch is not present in any other Seq or ordered collection type.

user> (.equals '(3) '(3N))
false
user> (.equals [3] [3N])
false
user> (.equals (seq [3]) (seq [3N]))
false
user> (.equals (lazy-seq [3]) (lazy-seq [3N]))
true

Screened by: Alex Miller



 Comments   
Comment by Jozef Wagner [ 11/Aug/14 9:32 AM ]

Patch clj-1501.diff with tests added

Comment by Andy Fingerhut [ 08/Oct/14 5:50 PM ]

This ticket has no Fix Version/s, but is Screened, so at least in some code I have it is 'off the JIRA workflow state diagram'. Not sure if it shows up that way in your filters, Alex.

Comment by Alex Miller [ 08/Oct/14 7:45 PM ]

Yup thanks.





[CLJ-1424] Feature Expressions Created: 15/May/14  Updated: 13/Oct/14

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

Type: Enhancement Priority: Major
Reporter: Ghadi Shayban Assignee: Alex Miller
Resolution: Unresolved Votes: 0
Labels: reader

Attachments: File CLJ-1424-2.diff     File clojure-feature-expressions.diff    
Approval: Incomplete

 Description   

Feature expressions based directly on Common Lisp. See Clojure design docs, which includes discussion and links to Common Lisp documentation for feature expressions here: http://dev.clojure.org/display/design/Feature+Expressions

#+ #- and or not
are supported. Unreadable tagged literals are suppressed through the *suppress-read* dynamic var. For example, with *features* being #{:clj}, which is the default, the following should read :foo

#+cljs #js {:one :two} :foo

The initial *features* set can be augmented (clj will always be included) with the clojure.features System property:

-Dclojure.features=production,embedded

Patch: CLJ-1424-2.diff

Questions: Should *suppress-read* override *read-eval*?

Related: CLJS-27, TRDR-14



 Comments   
Comment by Jozef Wagner [ 16/May/14 2:19 AM ]

Has there been a decision that CL syntax is going to be used? Related discussion can be found at design page, google groups discussion and another discussion.

Comment by Alex Miller [ 16/May/14 8:34 AM ]

No, no decisions on anything yet.

Comment by Ghadi Shayban [ 19/May/14 7:25 PM ]

Just to echo a comment from TRDR-14:

This is WIP and just one approach for feature expressions. There seem to be at least two couple diverging approaches emerging from the various discussion (Brandon Bloom's idea of read-time splicing being the other.)

In any case having all Clojure platforms be ready for the change is probably essential. Also backwards compatibility of feature expr code to Clojure 1.6 and below is also not trivial.

Comment by Kevin Downey [ 04/Aug/14 1:39 PM ]

if you have ever tried to do tooling for a language where the "parser" tossed out information or did some partial evaluation, it is a pain. this is basically what the #+cljs style feature expressions and bbloom's read time splicing both do with clojure's reader. I think resolving this at read time instead of having the compiler do it before macro expansion is a huge mistake and makes the reader much less useful for reading code.

Comment by Ghadi Shayban [ 04/Aug/14 2:00 PM ]

Kevin, what kind of tooling use case are you alluding to?

Comment by Kevin Downey [ 04/Aug/14 3:24 PM ]

any use case that involves reading code and not immediately handing it off to the compiler. if I wanted to write a little snippet to read in a function, add an unused argument to every arity then pprint it back, reader resolved feature expressions would not round trip.

if I want to write snippet of code to generate all the methods for a deftype (not a macro, just at the repl write a `for` expression) I can generate a clojure data structure, call pprint on it, then paste it in as code, reader feature expressions don't have a representation as data so I cannot do that, I would have to generate strings directly.

Comment by Alex Miller [ 22/Aug/14 9:10 AM ]

Changing Patch setting so this is not in Screenable yet (as it's still a wip).





[CLJ-1349] update to latest test.generative and prep for test.check Created: 10/Feb/14  Updated: 14/Oct/14

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

Type: Enhancement Priority: Major
Reporter: Stuart Halloway Assignee: Stuart Halloway
Resolution: Unresolved Votes: 1
Labels: None

Attachments: Text File clj-1349-1.patch     Text File clj-1349-2.patch     Text File clj-1349-3.patch    
Patch: Code and Test
Approval: Screened

 Description   

This patch updates build to use the latest test.generative, and organizes build.xml so test.check can be dropped in next.

Patch: clj-1349-3

Screeners: note that the elapsed time reported at the end of an Ant build is not wall clock time. Even though the generative tests run for 60 seconds, it will report less. You can see that the tests are running for the correct duration by timing with a stopwatch if you care.



 Comments   
Comment by Alex Miller [ 10/Feb/14 5:16 PM ]

1) The (System/setProperty "clojure.test.generative.msec" "60000") was removed from run_tests.clj but not added to the new src/script/run_test_generative.clj. Because of this, the generative tests don't run as long and the overall build time (from generative tests) is shorter. I do not know if that was intentional.

old:

[java] Framework clojure.test.generative
     [java] {:assert/pass 1282219, :test/group 6, :test/test 120, :test/iter 10025545}

new:

[java] Framework clojure.test.generative
     [java] {:assert/pass 118974, :test/group 6, :test/test 120, :test/iter 998991}

2) The new (non-generative) part of the test lists many more namespaces being tested in the output, including gensym-ish ones like "Testing G__25228". However, both before and after the same number of tests and assertions are printed at the end. Not sure why these differ.

3) The all target could depend on test-all instead of both test and test-generative, but ok as is.

Comment by Alex Miller [ 07/Oct/14 12:51 PM ]

Patch needs some freshening...

Comment by Alex Miller [ 08/Oct/14 10:35 AM ]

Freshen patch and made some mods

Comment by Alex Miller [ 08/Oct/14 10:37 AM ]

New patch applies properly to master. I also:

  • added calls to set java.awt.headless per patches that have been added in the meanwhile
  • rejiggered the ant build targets so that "ant test" still does the same thing it did before but now there are test-example and test-generative. I think this is a smaller change and removes any need to change what we already have doc'ed for developers and screeners (just adds new sub-flavors)
  • added test.check to the dependencies




[CLJ-1330] Class name clash between top-level functions and defn'ed ones Created: 22/Jan/14  Updated: 29/Oct/14

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

Type: Defect Priority: Critical
Reporter: Nicola Mometto Assignee: Unassigned
Resolution: Unresolved Votes: 8
Labels: aot, compiler

Attachments: Text File 0001-CLJ-1093-v3-no-locals-improv.patch     Text File 0001-CLJ-1093-v3.patch     Text File 0001-CLJ-1330-remove-local-binding-name-enhancement.patch     File demo1.clj    
Patch: Code
Approval: Incomplete

 Description   

Named anonymous fn's are not guaranteed to have unique class names when AOT-compiled.

For example:

(defn g [])
(def xx (fn g []))

When AOT-compiled both functions will emit user$g.class, the latter overwriting the former.

Impact: this affects apps like Cursive, which has been using a patched version of Clojure to get around this issue for quite a while.

Demonstration script: demo1.clj

Patch: 0001-CLJ-1093-v3.patch

Approach: Generate unique class names for named fn's the same way as for unnamed anonymous fn's.
The patch contains an additional enhancement to include the name of the local binding in the class name.

Comparison between pre and post patch naming scheme (N denotes unique number):

code before after note
(defn a []) user$a user$a same
(fn []) user$evalN$fn__N user$evalN$fn__N same
(fn a []) user$evalN$a__N user$evaN$a__N same
(let [a (fn [])] a) user$evalN$a__N user$evalN$a__N same
(let [a (fn x [])] a) user$eval1N$x__N user$evalN$a_x_N IMPROVED - contains local binding name
(def a (fn [])) user$a user$a same
(def a (fn x [])) user$x user$a_x_N FIXED conflict with (defn x [])
(def ^{:foo (fn [])} a) user$fn__N user$fn__N same
(def ^{:foo (fn a [])} a) user$a user$a__N FIXED conflict with (defn a [])
(def a (fn [] (fn []))) user$a$fn__N user$a$fn__N same
(def a (fn [] (fn x []))) user$a$x__N user$a$x__N same

See also: This patch also fixes the issue reported in CLJ-1227.

Screened by: Alex Miller - I am not sure whether the local binding name enhancement is worth doing. It improves debugging of which anonymous class you're talking about but has the downsides of increasing class name (and file name) length.



 Comments   
Comment by Ambrose Bonnaire-Sergeant [ 22/Jan/14 11:12 AM ]

This seems like the reason why jvm.tools.analyzer cannot analyze clojure.core. On analyzing a definline, there is an "attempted duplicate class definition" error.

This doesn't really matter, but I thought it may or may not be useful information to someone.

Comment by Nicola Mometto [ 22/Jan/14 11:35 AM ]

Attached a fix.

This also fixes AOT compiling of code like:

(def x (fn foo []))
(fn foo [])
Comment by Nicola Mometto [ 22/Jan/14 11:39 AM ]

Cleaned up patch

Comment by Alex Miller [ 22/Jan/14 12:43 PM ]

It looks like the patch changes indentation of some of the code - can you fix that?

Comment by Nicola Mometto [ 22/Jan/14 3:57 PM ]

Updated patch without whitespace changes

Comment by Alex Miller [ 22/Jan/14 4:15 PM ]

Thanks, that's helpful.

Comment by Alex Miller [ 24/Jan/14 10:03 AM ]

There is consensus that this is a problem, however this is an area of the code with broad impacts as it deals with how classes are named. To that end, there is some work that needs to be done in understanding the impacts before we can consider it.

Some questions we would like to answer:

1) According to Rich, naming of (fn x []) function classes used to work in the manner of this patch - with generated names. Some code archaeology needs to be done on why that was changed and whether the change to the current behavior was addressing problems that we are likely to run into.

2) Are there issues with recursive functions? Are there impacts either in AOT or non-AOT use cases? Need some tests.

3) Are there issues with dynamic redefinition of functions? With the static naming scheme, redefinition causes a new class of the same name which can be picked up by reload of classes compiled to the old definition. With the dynamic naming scheme, redefinition will create a differently named class so old classes can never pick up a redefinition. Is this a problem? What are the impacts with and without AOT? Need some tests.

Comment by Nicola Mometto [ 24/Jan/14 11:39 AM ]

Looks like the current behaviour has been such since https://github.com/clojure/clojure/commit/4651e60808bb459355a3a5d0d649c4697c672e28

My guess is that Rich simply forgot to consider the (def y (fn x [] ..)) case.

Regarding 2 and 3, the dynamic naming scheme is no different than what happens for anonymous functions so I don't see how this could cause any issue.

Recursion on the fn arg is simply a call to .invoke on "this", it's classname unaware.

I can add some tests to test that

(def y (fn x [] 1))
and
(fn x [] 2)
compile to different classnames but other than that I don't see what should be tested.

Comment by Stuart Halloway [ 27/Jun/14 2:17 PM ]

incomplete pending the answers to Alex Miller's questions in the comments

Comment by Nicola Mometto [ 27/Jun/14 3:20 PM ]

I believe I already answered his questions, I'll try to be a bit more explicit:
I tracked the relevant commit from Rich which added the dynamic naming behaviour https://github.com/clojure/clojure/commit/4651e60808bb459355a3a5d0d649c4697c672e28#diff-f17f860d14163523f1e1308ece478ddbL3081 which clearly shows that this bug was present since then so.

Regarding redefinitions or recursive functions, both of those operations never take in account the generated fn name so they are unaffected.

Comment by Alex Miller [ 12/Sep/14 4:32 PM ]

Summarizing some cases here from before/after the patch:

1) top-level fn (always has name)
	1.6 - namespace$name
	patch - namespace$name
2) non-top-level fn with name
	1.6 - namespace$name (collides with prior case)
	patch - namespace$topname__x__name  	<-- CHANGED
3) anonymous fn (no name)
	1.6 - namespace$name$fn__x
	patch - namespace$name$fn__x
4) top-level anonymous fn (no name, not at all useful :)
	1.6 - namespace$fn__x
	patch - namespace$fn__x

The key problem is that the first 2 cases produce the identical class name on 1.6. The patch alters the non-top-level named fn so there is no conflict.

Prior to the referenced old commit, I believe cases 1 and 2 would both produce namespace$name__x (where x is unique) so they would not collide. The change was made to prevent the top-level name from changing ("don't append numbers on top-level fn class names"). While the similar change was made on non-top-level fn names, I do not think it needed to be.

I've thought through (and tried) a bunch of the implications of this with the help of Nicola's comments above and I do not see an issue with any of the things I've considered. From a binary compatibility point of view with existing AOT code, old code compiled together should be self-consistent and continue to work. New compiled code will also be consistent. I can't think of a way that new code would expect to know the old name of a non-top-level function such that there could be an issue.

One question - why change the code such that the new class name is namespace$name$topname__x__name instead of namespace$name$topname_name__x (or something else?). And relatedly, while the diff is small, could we refactor a couple more lines to make the intent and cases clearer?

I am 90% ok with this patch but want a little thought into that question before I mark screened.

Comment by Nicola Mometto [ 12/Sep/14 4:47 PM ]

Alex, the attached patch munges into ns$topname__name__x, not into ns$topname__x__name.

Comment by Nicola Mometto [ 12/Sep/14 5:22 PM ]

The attached patch 0001-Fix-CLJ-1330refactored.patch contains the same fix from 0001-FixCLJ-1330-make-top-level-named-functions-classnam.patch but also refactors the code that deals with fn name munging

Comment by Alex Miller [ 12/Sep/14 6:22 PM ]

Hmmm.. I will double-check. That's not why I recall seeing when I did AOT.

Comment by Nicola Mometto [ 12/Sep/14 7:26 PM ]

New patch 0001-CLJ-1093-v2.patch improves the fn naming scheme a lot.
I've threw together a number of test cases that show the improvement + bug fixes:

user=> (fn [])
;; pre:
#<user$eval1$fn__2 user$eval1$fn__2@4e13aa4e>
;; post: (no change)
#<user$eval1$fn__3 user$eval1$fn__3@3c92218c>
user=> (fn a [])
;; pre:
#<user$eval5$a__6 user$eval5$a__6@6946a317>
;; post: (no change)
#<user$eval6$a__8 user$eval6$a__8@6f85c59c>
user=> (let [a (fn [])] a)
;; pre:
#<user$eval9$a__10 user$eval9$a__10@15fdf894>
;; post: (no change)
#<user$eval11$a__13 user$eval11$a__13@4d051922>
user=> (let [a (fn x [])] a)
;; pre: (only contains the name of the fn)
#<user$eval17$x__18 user$eval17$x__18@7f0cd67f>
;; post: (contains the name of the local aswell as the name of the fn
#<user$eval21$a__x__23 user$eval21$a__x__23@528ef256>
user=> (def a (fn [])) a
#'user/a
;; pre:
#<user$a user$a@33e1ccbc>
;; post: (no change)
#<user$a user$a@6bef63f9>
user=> (def a (fn x [])) a
#'user/a
;; pre: (BUG!)
#<user$x user$x@59a04a1b> 
;; post: (bug fixed)
#<user$a__x__28 user$a__x__28@5f0bebef>
user=> (def ^{:foo (fn [])} a) (-> (meta #'a) :foo)
#'user/a
;; pre:
#<user$fn__23 user$fn__23@d9c21c6>
;; post: (no change)
#<user$fn__30 user$fn__30@4cf0f2eb>
user=> (def ^{:foo (fn a [])} a) (-> (meta #'a) :foo)
#'user/a
;; pre: (BUG!)
#<user$a user$a@420dd874>
;; post: (bug fixed)
#<user$a__35 user$a__35@37ff95a9>
user=> (def a (fn [] (fn []))) (a)
#'user/a
;; pre:
#<user$a$fn__30 user$a$fn__30@6f57be76>
;; post: (no change)
#<user$a$fn__41 user$a$fn__41@fd34eac>
user=> (def a (fn [] (fn x []))) (a)
#'user/a
;; pre:
#<user$a$x__35 user$a$x__35@79930089>
;; post: (no change)
#<user$a$x__48 user$a$x__48@6fc334de>
user=> (let [x (fn [])] (def a (fn [] x))) a (a)
#'user/a
;; pre:
#<user$eval40$a__43 user$eval40$a__43@6db1694e>
#<user$eval40$x__41 user$eval40$x__41@20bd16bb>
;; post (no change)
#<user$eval54$a__58 user$eval54$a__58@7c721de>
#<user$eval54$x__56 user$eval54$x__56@43f7b41b>
user=> (let [x (fn a [])] (def a (fn [] x))) (a)
#'user/a
;; pre: (the local binding name doesn't appear in the class name)
#<user$eval48$a__49 user$eval48$a__49@75d6d1d4>
;; post: (the local binding name is included in the class name)
#<user$eval64$x__a__66 user$eval64$x__a__66@460d4>

As you can see, this last patch not only fixes the two bugs, but also improves fn naming in let contexts by preserving the name of the local binding in the class name, this I believe will be a great improvement in the understandability of stacktraces.

Comment by Alex Miller [ 25/Sep/14 7:00 AM ]

The patch should be changed to not create suffix if it's not going to be used. Please update the patch to inline that into each branch name = nm.name + "__" + RT.nextID();.

I am unsure whether the "enhancement" part of this patch goes too far. I think it does provide some improvements in debugging but those seem small to me. I am somewhat concerned about greatly increasing the name of the class for nested locals thus making it harder to read stack traces. There is a large limit to class name size of 16 bits (what you can put in the constant table) but class names also map to file names and there have historically been issues on some older Windows architectures with file size limits - we are increasing the risk of running into problems with this. Small risks. I am ok with passing this on to Rich though and he can decide whether to kick that part back or not.

Comment by Nicola Mometto [ 25/Sep/14 7:08 AM ]

0001-CLJ-1093-v3.patch is identical to 0001-CLJ-1093-v2.patch except it doesn't call RT.nextID() when not necessary, as per Alex's request

Alex, if this is ok please change the "Patch:" field in the description, I won't do that myself since this ticket is now screened

Comment by Nicola Mometto [ 06/Oct/14 11:54 AM ]

Addressing the screening comment by Alex Miller, I've attached an alternative patch "0001-CLJ-1093v3-no-locals-improv.patch" which is identical to "0001CLJ-1093-v3.patch" except it doesn't include the local binding name enhancement, so that it can be picked in case Rich decides that that improvement is out of scope for this ticket.

Comment by Alex Miller [ 28/Oct/14 12:05 PM ]

I've reopened this issue based on early reports of breakage due to long file names.

Two reports:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/clojure-dev/hnkJb9_il_M/4e5smM6mVlIJ
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/clojure/hnkJb9_il_M/QOaTdCo5wmkJ

Comment by Alex Miller [ 28/Oct/14 12:21 PM ]

Here's an example of a class name that is too long on Ubuntu 12.04 LTS 64bit / Java8 - reported max file size is 143 chars:

https://github.com/ska2342/nested-fn-breaks-clojure-17/blob/master/src/nested_fn_breaks_clojure_17/core.clj

With 1.6.0: (95 chars)
core$this_function_breaks_with_clojure_1_7$my_anonymous_function_18$iter1923$fn24$fn_25

With 1.7.0-alpha3: (144 chars)
core$this_function_breaks_with_clojure_1_7$my_anonymous_function_my_anonymous_function19$iter4951auto__iter2024$fn25$fn_26.class

With the alternate patch here, the name would be: (95 chars)
core$this_function_breaks_with_clojure_1_7$my_anonymous_function_19$iter2024$fn25$fn_26

Comment by Nicola Mometto [ 28/Oct/14 12:26 PM ]

patch "0001-CLJ-1330-remove-local-binding-name-enhancement.patch" has the same effect of reverting f149260c14a75367dc9eba91cbe9b78110113566 and applying "0001-CLJ-1093-v3-no-locals-improv.patch" in case this is preferable

Comment by Stefan Kamphausen [ 29/Oct/14 7:44 AM ]

The tiny and unusual max file size of 143 is standard in the Ubuntu 12.04 crypto container for the home directory. You can get it for any directory with 'getconf NAME_MAX /path/to/dir'.

My initial problem (other than the file to reproduce on github) was triggered by the fns in a for-expression. Don't know if that makes any difference for you.





Generated at Thu Oct 30 08:03:47 CDT 2014 using JIRA 4.4#649-r158309.