I need reviewer of https://pharo.fogbugz.com/defa
Locked
 
|
Hi
I continued to clean that classes have categories and method protocols because it was not finished. This entry is just adding protocol in the classes that were missing it, adding comments, and fixing some local senders It does not remove the category API but puts it in a accessing-backward protocol and in a second step I will fix all the senders I can (ie not Metacello for example). Category is really overloaded and we get lost when trying to understand code. I want to rename RBRule 'category' into 'kind' for this reason. Stef |
|
|
I tried, but it seems some packages are missing from the inbox.
cheers -ben On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 2:19 PM, stepharo <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hi > > I continued to clean that classes have categories and method protocols > because it was not finished. > This entry is just adding protocol in the classes that were missing it, > adding comments, and fixing some local senders > It does not remove the category API but puts it in a accessing-backward > protocol and in a second step I will fix all the senders I can (ie not > Metacello for example). > Category is really overloaded and we get lost when trying to understand > code. > I want to rename RBRule 'category' into 'kind' for this reason. > > Stef > |
|
|
Stef, I can now see all the dependent packages for the new slice, but
I still have a strange error. However I'm not sure if its a bug or something unique at my end. Can someone try merging SLICE-Issue-15646-Cleaning-method-category-api-should-be-protocol-part-1-StephaneDucasse.1 What I see at top of stack is two calls to MCVersionMerger>>addVersion: MCVersionMerger>>addVersion: aVersion records add: (MCMergeRecord version: aVersion). aVersion dependencies do: [:ea | | dep satisfied | dep := ea resolve. satisfied := (records anySatisfy: [:r | r version = dep]). satisfied ifFalse: [self addVersion: dep]] "<<< race? " displayingProgress: [ :ea| 'Searching dependency: ', ea package name] "15646Note: variable /satisfied/ added for reporting/debugging" One level down from where the error occurs the debugger shows... /aVersion/ --> a MCVersion(SLICE-Issue-15646-Cleaning-method-category-api-should-be-protocol-part-1-StephaneDucasse.1) /ea/ --> a MCVersionInfo(DebuggerActions-StephaneDucasse.75) /dep/ --> nil /satisfied/ --> false and the following which contradicts the value in /satisfied/ (records anySatisfy: [:r | r version = dep]) --> true. so there seems to be a race such that the ifFalse block is improperly executed, such that the recursive call on top of stack has... /aVersion/-->nil hence MNU receiver of "dependencies" is nil. cheers -ben On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Ben Coman <[hidden email]> wrote: > I tried, but it seems some packages are missing from the inbox. > cheers -ben > > On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 2:19 PM, stepharo <[hidden email]> wrote: >> Hi >> >> I continued to clean that classes have categories and method protocols >> because it was not finished. >> This entry is just adding protocol in the classes that were missing it, >> adding comments, and fixing some local senders >> It does not remove the category API but puts it in a accessing-backward >> protocol and in a second step I will fix all the senders I can (ie not >> Metacello for example). >> Category is really overloaded and we get lost when trying to understand >> code. >> I want to rename RBRule 'category' into 'kind' for this reason. >> >> Stef >> |
Re: I need reviewer of https://pharo.fogbugz.com/defa
|
|
Kernel-StephaneDucasse.2042 DebuggerActions-StephaneDucasse.75 2015-06-01 15:04 GMT+02:00 Ben Coman <[hidden email]>: Stef, I can now see all the dependent packages for the new slice, but |
|
|
In reply to this post by Ben Coman
I hate so much this bug....
Le 1/6/15 15:04, Ben Coman a écrit : > Stef, I can now see all the dependent packages for the new slice, but > I still have a strange error. However I'm not sure if its a bug or > something unique at my end. > > Can someone try merging > SLICE-Issue-15646-Cleaning-method-category-api-should-be-protocol-part-1-StephaneDucasse.1 > > What I see at top of stack is two calls to MCVersionMerger>>addVersion: > > MCVersionMerger>>addVersion: aVersion > records add: (MCMergeRecord version: aVersion). > aVersion dependencies > do: [:ea | | dep satisfied | > dep := ea resolve. > satisfied := (records anySatisfy: [:r | r version = dep]). > satisfied ifFalse: [self addVersion: dep]] "<<< race? " > displayingProgress: [ :ea| 'Searching dependency: ', ea > package name] > "15646Note: variable /satisfied/ added for reporting/debugging" > > One level down from where the error occurs the debugger shows... > > /aVersion/ --> a > MCVersion(SLICE-Issue-15646-Cleaning-method-category-api-should-be-protocol-part-1-StephaneDucasse.1) > > /ea/ --> a MCVersionInfo(DebuggerActions-StephaneDucasse.75) > > /dep/ --> nil > > /satisfied/ --> false > > and the following which contradicts the value in /satisfied/ > > (records anySatisfy: [:r | r version = dep]) --> true. > > so there seems to be a race such that the ifFalse block is improperly > executed, such that the recursive call on top of stack has... > > /aVersion/-->nil > > hence MNU receiver of "dependencies" is nil. > > cheers -ben > > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Ben Coman <[hidden email]> wrote: >> I tried, but it seems some packages are missing from the inbox. >> cheers -ben >> >> On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 2:19 PM, stepharo <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> Hi >>> >>> I continued to clean that classes have categories and method protocols >>> because it was not finished. >>> This entry is just adding protocol in the classes that were missing it, >>> adding comments, and fixing some local senders >>> It does not remove the category API but puts it in a accessing-backward >>> protocol and in a second step I will fix all the senders I can (ie not >>> Metacello for example). >>> Category is really overloaded and we get lost when trying to understand >>> code. >>> I want to rename RBRule 'category' into 'kind' for this reason. >>> >>> Stef >>> > |
Re: I need reviewer of https://pharo.fogbugz.com/defa
|
|
Indeed… this has to do something with caching: when looking a .mcz the system just takes the one it finds, which might be
one with the same name but different. Maybe we could for real put (part of) the UID in the filename? In a disconnected system the case that the filename is the same for different files will always happen if the name is contructed as it is now. Marcus > On 02 Jun 2015, at 22:37, stepharo <[hidden email]> wrote: > > I hate so much this bug.... > > > Le 1/6/15 15:04, Ben Coman a écrit : >> Stef, I can now see all the dependent packages for the new slice, but >> I still have a strange error. However I'm not sure if its a bug or >> something unique at my end. >> >> Can someone try merging >> SLICE-Issue-15646-Cleaning-method-category-api-should-be-protocol-part-1-StephaneDucasse.1 >> >> What I see at top of stack is two calls to MCVersionMerger>>addVersion: >> >> MCVersionMerger>>addVersion: aVersion >> records add: (MCMergeRecord version: aVersion). >> aVersion dependencies >> do: [:ea | | dep satisfied | >> dep := ea resolve. >> satisfied := (records anySatisfy: [:r | r version = dep]). >> satisfied ifFalse: [self addVersion: dep]] "<<< race? " >> displayingProgress: [ :ea| 'Searching dependency: ', ea >> package name] >> "15646Note: variable /satisfied/ added for reporting/debugging" >> >> One level down from where the error occurs the debugger shows... >> >> /aVersion/ --> a >> MCVersion(SLICE-Issue-15646-Cleaning-method-category-api-should-be-protocol-part-1-StephaneDucasse.1) >> >> /ea/ --> a MCVersionInfo(DebuggerActions-StephaneDucasse.75) >> >> /dep/ --> nil >> >> /satisfied/ --> false >> >> and the following which contradicts the value in /satisfied/ >> >> (records anySatisfy: [:r | r version = dep]) --> true. >> >> so there seems to be a race such that the ifFalse block is improperly >> executed, such that the recursive call on top of stack has... >> >> /aVersion/-->nil >> >> hence MNU receiver of "dependencies" is nil. >> >> cheers -ben >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Ben Coman <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> I tried, but it seems some packages are missing from the inbox. >>> cheers -ben >>> >>> On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 2:19 PM, stepharo <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> Hi >>>> >>>> I continued to clean that classes have categories and method protocols >>>> because it was not finished. >>>> This entry is just adding protocol in the classes that were missing it, >>>> adding comments, and fixing some local senders >>>> It does not remove the category API but puts it in a accessing-backward >>>> protocol and in a second step I will fix all the senders I can (ie not >>>> Metacello for example). >>>> Category is really overloaded and we get lost when trying to understand >>>> code. >>>> I want to rename RBRule 'category' into 'kind' for this reason. >>>> >>>> Stef >>>> >> > > |
Re: I need reviewer of https://pharo.fogbugz.com/defa
|
|
2015-06-03 8:22 GMT+02:00 Marcus Denker <[hidden email]>: Indeed… this has to do something with caching: when looking a .mcz the system just takes the one it finds, which might be Unless the mcz searched for is a dependency, in which case it checks the uuid as well (not only the name).
Would that be backward compatible with existing repositories?
Thierry
|
Re: I need reviewer of https://pharo.fogbugz.com/defa
|
|
I would just put it instead of the Name of the submitter… Marcus |
Re: I need reviewer of https://pharo.fogbugz.com/defa
|
|
2015-06-03 9:56 GMT+02:00 Marcus Denker <[hidden email]>:
I'm not that worried about that problem, but the fact that in MC, when you query a repo, you build a kind of a match between your target version info and a "possible" file name... If you start creating names with UUIDs in them, how will the system distinguish between version infos where you should use the UUID and version infos (for example, in the history) where you shouldn't. Give a higher priority to matching with an UUID-based name ? Go through Gofer twice, first with a UUID version of the name, then with a non-UUID version of the name if the first one fails? I believe there are places (MC itself, Gofer?) where the true version info is decoupled from the search and only the package name is used (i.e. name + author + version number). Thierry
|
Re: I need reviewer of https://pharo.fogbugz.com/defa
|
|
In reply to this post by Marcus Denker-4
2015-06-03 8:22 GMT+02:00 Marcus Denker <[hidden email]>: Indeed… this has to do something with caching: when looking a .mcz the system just takes the one it finds, which might be here is a minimal change to the way it uses the cache, or omitting the cache after the correct version wasn't find in the cache. What do you think, may this work? nicolai
|
no_cach_if_not_found_in_cache.1.cs (1K)
Re: I need reviewer of https://pharo.fogbugz.com/defa
|
|
2015-06-03 11:41 GMT+02:00 Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]>:
I'm not sure the problem is there. Often, in configurations, you don't have the full version info, just the mcz name :( And I would expect that a given repo has a single mcz with a given name (i.e. the repo cache should be working properly)... Nice find that each file based repository has a cache in addition to the main package cache.... Package loads with version info happens in two cases: - dependency loading (i.e. slices) - history loading (i.e. browsing history and merges). Anything else is loading by name, since this is what is recorded in Configurations and Gofer scripts. Thierry
|
Re: I need reviewer of https://pharo.fogbugz.com/defa
|
|
2015-06-03 13:22 GMT+02:00 Thierry Goubier <[hidden email]>:
The problem is that the package "loading" again searches the cache, without the version id: search for package with name+id -> search cache for package with name+id -> "not found -> search other repos -> other repo: -> search again the cache for package with name+id -> "not found" -> load version with name -> search cache for package with *name only* -> "Found" "other" repo thinks it has loaded its package with that name -> compare name+id -> "not found" <- nothing found, even if it is (online) in other repo.
|
Re: I need reviewer of https://pharo.fogbugz.com/defa
|
|
2015-06-03 14:19 GMT+02:00 Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]>:
Are you sure? Because the code you describe does not correct/affect that. 'self versionFromFileNamed: fileName' looks only into that special repository cache, not the global one. We need to build test repositories to have correct coverage of those issues, because at the moment I'm not sure I understand the case you are describing :( Thierry
|
Re: I need reviewer of https://pharo.fogbugz.com/defa
|
|
2015-06-03 14:47 GMT+02:00 Thierry Goubier <[hidden email]>:
self versionFromFileNamed: fileName is called after it isn't found in the MCCacheRepository and if it is not found in its own special repository cache , it is loaded with self loadVersionFromFileNamed: and this again looks up in the MCCacheRepostory: loadVersionFromFileNamed: aString (MCCacheRepository uniqueInstance includesFileNamed: aString) ifTrue: [ ^ MCCacheRepository uniqueInstance loadVersionFromFileNamed: aString]. ^ self versionReaderForFileNamed: aString do: [:r | r version] but this time it searches the package in the MCCacheRepitory by its name only and load the version info from that file.
Try to load SLICE-Issue-15646-Cleaning-method-category-api-should-be-protocol-part-1-StephaneDucasse.1 from pharo 5.0 inbox repository. This slice has dependencies to packages DebuggerActions-StephaneDucasse.75, Kernel-StephaneDucasse.2042 which are both in pharo 5.0 main and inbox repository but with different uuids If pharo 5.0 main repository is searched first, it will only find packages with the wrong version info, even if the packages in the 5.0 inbox have the correct version info.
|
Re: I need reviewer of https://pharo.fogbugz.com/defa
|
|
2015-06-03 15:09 GMT+02:00 Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]>:
Thanks for finding that. Interesting, that semantic missmatch ... which amounts to loosing the version info in places during the loading process. Notes for documentation : - FileTree changes versionFromFileNamed: to disable the internal repository cache (but cache is still an instance variable because of inheritance, and it goes through PackageCache). - GitFileTree avoids the PackageCache altogether and is the only type of repo not to have that bug in Pharo4 (Yes! But I had no idea why :)).
Yuck :( So, if I understood well, what is happening is: - Reading from Pharo5Main, DebuggerActions-StephaneDucasse.75 is loaded in PackageCache (and in the cache of Pharo5Main). - Comparing UUIDs say that this is not the right one. - Reading from Pharo5Inbox, DebuggerActions-StephaneDucasse.75 is loaded in the cache of Pharo5Inbox - First read inside package cache say that the file exist but has the wrong UUID - Second read has matching file name inside Pharo5Inbox - So it loads the version from Pharo5Inbox - which test PackageCache for DebuggerActions-StephaneDucasse.75 ... which is true - But uuids don't match - so it fails.... I hate package-cache.
You're right. So your fix should work. I would not hesitate however: - to move the version reading line inside versionWithInfo:ifAbsent: - to factor the cache update into an #updateCacheWith: v (so that it can also be called from versionFromFileNamed:) called from versionWithInfo:ifAbsent: Thierry
|
Re: I need reviewer of https://pharo.fogbugz.com/defa
|
|
2015-06-03 15:46 GMT+02:00 Thierry Goubier <[hidden email]>:
|
|
|
In reply to this post by Nicolai Hess
You guys are moving so fast. I went to review it but it is already
integrated :P Anyway I tried it and it worked well, load Stef's 15646 slice no problem. Well done Nicolai. cheers -ben On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > 2015-06-03 8:22 GMT+02:00 Marcus Denker <[hidden email]>: >> >> Indeed… this has to do something with caching: when looking a .mcz the >> system just takes the one it finds, which might be >> one with the same name but different. > > > here is a minimal change to the way it uses the cache, or omitting the cache > after the correct version > wasn't find in the cache. > > What do you think, may this work? > > nicolai > > > >> >> >> Maybe we could for real put (part of) the UID in the filename? >> >> In a disconnected system the case that the filename is the same for >> different files will always happen if the name is contructed >> as it is now. >> >> Marcus >> >> > On 02 Jun 2015, at 22:37, stepharo <[hidden email]> wrote: >> > >> > I hate so much this bug.... >> > >> > >> > Le 1/6/15 15:04, Ben Coman a écrit : >> >> Stef, I can now see all the dependent packages for the new slice, but >> >> I still have a strange error. However I'm not sure if its a bug or >> >> something unique at my end. >> >> >> >> Can someone try merging >> >> >> >> SLICE-Issue-15646-Cleaning-method-category-api-should-be-protocol-part-1-StephaneDucasse.1 >> >> >> >> What I see at top of stack is two calls to MCVersionMerger>>addVersion: >> >> >> >> MCVersionMerger>>addVersion: aVersion >> >> records add: (MCMergeRecord version: aVersion). >> >> aVersion dependencies >> >> do: [:ea | | dep satisfied | >> >> dep := ea resolve. >> >> satisfied := (records anySatisfy: [:r | r version = >> >> dep]). >> >> satisfied ifFalse: [self addVersion: dep]] "<<< race? >> >> " >> >> displayingProgress: [ :ea| 'Searching dependency: ', ea >> >> package name] >> >> "15646Note: variable /satisfied/ added for reporting/debugging" >> >> >> >> One level down from where the error occurs the debugger shows... >> >> >> >> /aVersion/ --> a >> >> >> >> MCVersion(SLICE-Issue-15646-Cleaning-method-category-api-should-be-protocol-part-1-StephaneDucasse.1) >> >> >> >> /ea/ --> a MCVersionInfo(DebuggerActions-StephaneDucasse.75) >> >> >> >> /dep/ --> nil >> >> >> >> /satisfied/ --> false >> >> >> >> and the following which contradicts the value in /satisfied/ >> >> >> >> (records anySatisfy: [:r | r version = dep]) --> true. >> >> >> >> so there seems to be a race such that the ifFalse block is improperly >> >> executed, such that the recursive call on top of stack has... >> >> >> >> /aVersion/-->nil >> >> >> >> hence MNU receiver of "dependencies" is nil. >> >> >> >> cheers -ben >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Ben Coman <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >>> I tried, but it seems some packages are missing from the inbox. >> >>> cheers -ben >> >>> >> >>> On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 2:19 PM, stepharo <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >>>> Hi >> >>>> >> >>>> I continued to clean that classes have categories and method >> >>>> protocols >> >>>> because it was not finished. >> >>>> This entry is just adding protocol in the classes that were missing >> >>>> it, >> >>>> adding comments, and fixing some local senders >> >>>> It does not remove the category API but puts it in a >> >>>> accessing-backward >> >>>> protocol and in a second step I will fix all the senders I can (ie >> >>>> not >> >>>> Metacello for example). >> >>>> Category is really overloaded and we get lost when trying to >> >>>> understand >> >>>> code. >> >>>> I want to rename RBRule 'category' into 'kind' for this reason. >> >>>> >> >>>> Stef >> >>>> >> >> >> > >> > >> >> > |
«
Return to Pharo Smalltalk Developers
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |