-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 453
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
Improve Caml_obj equal function to support errors #6937
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Improve Caml_obj equal function to support errors #6937
Conversation
if a_type == "function" || b_type == "function" { | ||
raise(Invalid_argument("equal: functional value")) | ||
} /* first, check using reference equality */ |
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.
Since we checked the functions using strict equal a === b
, it doesn't make sense to raise an error at this point.
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.
Why not?
The error says you cannot compare functional values. (Unless they are identical, in which case you can).
We might change the stance on this, but both choices are valid design choices.
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.
I think according to the funciton name equal
it makes sense that when you compare two non-identical function values, it returns false
. Also, it improves performance for non function
values, since there's no need to specifically check for it.
if ( | ||
a_type == "string" || | ||
(a_type == "number" || | ||
(a_type == "bigint" || | ||
(a_type == "boolean" || | ||
(a_type == "undefined" || a === %raw(`null`))))) | ||
) { | ||
if a_type !== "object" || a === %raw(`null`) { |
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.
The same, but shorter, faster, easier to maintain, and prevents from forgetting symbol and other types.
/* a_type = "object" || "symbol" */ | ||
b_type == "number" || (b_type == "bigint" || (b_type == "undefined" || b === %raw(`null`))) | ||
) { | ||
if b_type !== "object" || b === %raw(`null`) { |
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.
A good example of forgetting checking various types
if tag_a == 248 /* object/exception */ { | ||
Obj.magic(Obj.field(a, 1)) === Obj.magic(Obj.field(b, 1)) | ||
} else if tag_a == 251 /* abstract_tag */ { | ||
raise(Invalid_argument("equal: abstract value")) |
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.
Removed legacy check
if tag_a !== tag_b { | ||
false |
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.
I'm not sure of the usefulness of the optimisation 🤔
But let's keep it.
} else if O.isArray(a) { | ||
let len_a = Obj.size(a) | ||
let len_b = Obj.size(b) |
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.
Length check makes sense only for arrays, so moved it inside of the if O.isArray(a)
block
} else if %raw(`a instanceof Date`) { | ||
if %raw(`b instanceof Date`) { |
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.
Split the check so it earlier returns false
when b is not an instance of Date without running some unexpected code.
false | ||
} | ||
} else { | ||
aux_obj_equal(a, b) |
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.
I've taken a look at the generated code for the function, and it's not very optimised. Not the goal of the PR, so kept it as it is.
jscomp/runtime/caml_obj.res
Outdated
} else if %raw(`a instanceof Error`) { | ||
let a: {..} = Obj.magic(a) | ||
let b: {..} = Obj.magic(b) | ||
if %raw(`b instanceof Error`) && a["message"] === b["message"] { | ||
equal(a["clause"], b["clause"]) | ||
} else { | ||
false | ||
} |
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.
for in doesn't work on Error
, so have a special case for them.
1c5b0bf
to
c912856
Compare
Can't find the convo anymore. The other way is not perfect either Just saying: there are trade offs and one just needs to decide, with no clear superior choice |
After the change |
I don't see a real downside to the function equality change either. We need to document it as a (potentially) breaking change, but I think it is unlikely in practice that people are using this with functions and relying on an exception being thrown in that case. |
Agree. I didn't include it in changelog, since I can't imagine a case when somebody can rely on it |
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.
Looks good.
I remember there are some corner case tests in rescript-core
that would make sense to check.
@zth do you remember?
@cristianoc @zth I ran the tests with my changes and it fails. But that's because of the exns changes I'm fixing right now. In other words, It's not working with rescript-12-alpha |
I missed here.. What are the use cases of the equality check for Error objects and its messages? Can you add some examples or tests here? I see... so this is just for completeness |
And improve performance