Skip to content
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

gh-127124: Pass optional state to context watcher callback #127140

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

rhansen
Copy link
Contributor

@rhansen rhansen commented Nov 22, 2024

This enables users to associate state with the callback without relying on globals.

Also:

  • Refactor the tests for improved readability and extensibility, and to cover the new state object.

  • Drop the pointer from the PyContext_WatchCallback typedef. This de-obfuscates the fact that pointers are involved, and makes it possible to forward-declare functions to improve readability:

    static PyContext_WatchCallback my_callback;
    
    int
    my_callback(PyObject *cbarg, PyContextEvent event, PyObject *obj)
    {
        ...
    }

This will conflict with #124741; if one is merged I'll rebase the other.


📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://cpython-previews--127140.org.readthedocs.build/

Copy link
Member

@ZeroIntensity ZeroIntensity left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Needs a NEWS entry (even though it's a change to a new feature, we want to show that we changed it in the a3 changelog)

@rhansen rhansen force-pushed the gh-127124-context-watcher-opaque-state branch from f6ffc28 to 3130a2f Compare November 24, 2024 08:37
@rhansen rhansen changed the title gh-127124: Add opaque pointer to context watcher callback gh-127124: Pass optional state to context watcher callback Nov 24, 2024
Copy link
Contributor Author

@rhansen rhansen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'll open a separate PR for the callable idea I mentioned in #127124 (comment) so that we can compare the two and decide which we like better.

Edit: Done; see #127247.

PyContext_WatchCallback context_watchers[CONTEXT_MAX_WATCHERS];
struct {
PyContext_WatchCallback *callback;
PyObject *arg;
Copy link
Contributor Author

@rhansen rhansen Nov 24, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does this need a Py_VISIT somewhere? I didn't see any for the other fields in this struct, but maybe the GC does something special with this struct?

This enables users to associate state with the callback without
relying on globals.

Also:
  * Refactor the tests for improved readability and extensibility, and
    to cover the new state object.
  * Drop the pointer from the `PyContext_WatchCallback` typedef.  This
    de-obfuscates the fact that pointers are involved, and makes it
    possible to forward-declare functions to improve readability:

        static PyContext_WatchCallback my_callback;

        int
        my_callback(PyObject *cbarg, PyContextEvent event, PyObject *obj)
        {
            ...
        }
@rhansen rhansen force-pushed the gh-127124-context-watcher-opaque-state branch from 3130a2f to c9e95d4 Compare November 24, 2024 09:16
@ZeroIntensity
Copy link
Member

FWIW, no need to force push changes--it makes reviewing harder. It's fine to just commit normally, and then everything gets squashed.

@rhansen
Copy link
Contributor Author

rhansen commented Nov 25, 2024

Force pushing is the only way to update the commit message.

@ZeroIntensity
Copy link
Member

Yes, but it makes reviewing more difficult. FWIW, nobody really cares about the commit messages in the PR itself, the end message that gets squashed is really what matters. (There's a section in the devguide about this, IIRC.)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants