[#CLJ-1422] Recur around try boxes primitives - Clojure JIRA

Details

Type: Enhancement
Status: Open
Priority: Minor
Resolution: Unresolved
Affects Version/s: Release 1.5, Release 1.6
Fix Version/s: None
Component/s: None
Labels:

Description

Primitive function and recur variables can't pass through a (try) cleanly; they're boxed to Object instead. This causes reflection warnings for fns or loops that use primitive types.

user=> (set! *warn-on-reflection* true)
true
 
user=> (fn [] (loop [t 0] (recur t)))
#<user$eval676$fn__677 user$eval676$fn__677@3d80023a>
 
user=> (fn [] (loop [t 0] (recur (try t))))
NO_SOURCE_FILE:1 recur arg for primitive local: t is not matching primitive, had: Object, needed: long
Auto-boxing loop arg: t
#<user$eval680$fn__681 user$eval680$fn__681@5419323a>

user=> (fn [^long x] (recur (try x)))
NO_SOURCE_FILE:1 recur arg for primitive local: x is not matching primitive, had: Object, needed: long

CompilerException java.lang.IllegalArgumentException:  recur arg for primitive local: x is not matching primitive, had: Object, needed: long, compiling:(NO_SOURCE_PATH:1:1)

Activity

Ascending order - Click to sort in descending order

Hide

Permalink

David James added a comment - 15/Jun/14 10:27 PM

Without commenting on the most desirable behavior, the following code does not cause reflection warnings:

user=> (set! *warn-on-reflection* true)
true
user=> (fn [] (loop [t 0] (recur (long (try t)))))
#<user$eval673$fn__674 user$eval673$fn__674@4e56c411>

Show

David James added a comment - 15/Jun/14 10:27 PM Without commenting on the most desirable behavior, the following code does not cause reflection warnings:

user=> (set! *warn-on-reflection* true)
true
user=> (fn [] (loop [t 0] (recur (long (try t)))))
#<user$eval673$fn__674 user$eval673$fn__674@4e56c411>

Hide

Permalink

Nicola Mometto added a comment - 16/Jun/14 6:33 AM

Similar ticket http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-701

Show

Nicola Mometto added a comment - 16/Jun/14 6:33 AM Similar ticket http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-701

Hide

Permalink

Kevin Downey added a comment - 21/Jul/14 6:59 PM - edited

try/catch in the compiler only implements Expr, not MaybePrimitiveExpr, looking at extending TryExpr with MaybePrimitiveExpr it seems simple enough, but it turns out recur analyzes it's arguments in the statement context, which causes (try ...) to essentially wrap itself in a function like ((fn [] (try ...))), at which point it is an invokeexpr which is much harder to add maybeprimitiveexpr too and it reduces to the same case as CLJ-701

Show

Kevin Downey added a comment - 21/Jul/14 6:59 PM - edited try/catch in the compiler only implements Expr, not MaybePrimitiveExpr, looking at extending TryExpr with MaybePrimitiveExpr it seems simple enough, but it turns out recur analyzes it's arguments in the statement context, which causes (try ...) to essentially wrap itself in a function like ((fn [] (try ...))), at which point it is an invokeexpr which is much harder to add maybeprimitiveexpr too and it reduces to the same case as CLJ-701

Hide

Permalink

Kevin Downey added a comment - 22/Jul/14 9:27 PM

http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-701 has a patch that I think solves this

Show

Kevin Downey added a comment - 22/Jul/14 9:27 PM http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-701 has a patch that I think solves this

Hide

Permalink

Alex Miller added a comment - 28/Jul/14 1:56 PM

Should I dupe this to CLJ-701?

Show

Alex Miller added a comment - 28/Jul/14 1:56 PM Should I dupe this to CLJ-701?

Hide

Permalink

Kevin Downey added a comment - 28/Jul/14 5:22 PM

if you want the fixes for try out of the return context to be part of CLJ-701 then yes it is a dupe, if you are unsure or would prefer 701 to stay more focused (my patch may not be acceptable, or may be too large and doing too much) then no it wouldn't be a dupe. I sort of took it on myself to solve both in the patch on CLJ-701 because I came to CLJ-701 via Nicola's comment here, and the same compiler machinery can be used for both.

I think the status is pending on the status of CLJ-701.

Show

Kevin Downey added a comment - 28/Jul/14 5:22 PM if you want the fixes for try out of the return context to be part of CLJ-701 then yes it is a dupe, if you are unsure or would prefer 701 to stay more focused (my patch may not be acceptable, or may be too large and doing too much) then no it wouldn't be a dupe. I sort of took it on myself to solve both in the patch on CLJ-701 because I came to CLJ-701 via Nicola's comment here, and the same compiler machinery can be used for both. I think the status is pending on the status of CLJ-701.

People

Assignee:

Unassigned

Reporter:

Kyle Kingsbury

Vote (0)

Watch (2)

Dates

Created:

14/May/14 8:32 PM

Updated:

28/Jul/14 5:22 PM