-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 225
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Implement this_client() #456
Open
ranfdev
wants to merge
1
commit into
capnproto:master
Choose a base branch
from
ranfdev:this_client
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What if
this_client()
returned an untyped capability -- perhaps just aBox<dyn ClientHook>
? That would not require any more generics, would it?(It looks to me like that's how capnproto-c++ implements
thisCap()
.)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Having a
params.this_client()
returningBox<dyn ClientHook>
would be possible but it has the following drawbacks:params
is passed by value, and can be moved around and stored eventually for a'static
lifetime. That meansparams
would need to own a copy of the current client, requiring aBox
allocation for each method call. Unless we store aWeak
reference to theClientHook
, but thenparams.this_client()
needs to return anOption<T>
, because theparams
we own may reference a deadClientHook
.Returning an
Option<Box<dyn ClientHook>>
isn't great compared to a fully typedcalculator::op_add::Client
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
An alternative API which doesn't require unsafe nor a static variable is
params.client_for(self)
. (Where self is actually&mut self
, because we are inside a method call).By requiring
&mut self
as a parameter, we restrict the ability to get a client while we are inside the method call, and we also have the type information required to return a typed Client.EDIT: no, this API doesn't have enough type information to return a typed client... But at least it can return directly a
Box<dyn ClientHook>
and doesn't need to return anOption<Box<dyn ClientHook>>