Package locks #1618
Merged
Package locks #1618
Conversation
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
Bike
force-pushed
the
package-locks
branch
4 times, most recently
from
c5999e0 to
c0de8e4
Compare
This fixes a build problem where we were "returning" nil from a function declared as returning Package_sp, the nil being a placeholder since the error never actually returned.
Doing it in macros is too high level, I've realized belatedly. This might not be low level enough - in particular there are cells to worry about - but it's something.
might as well reuse some slot names
If we try to export after uninterning, we get an error about the symbol not being accessible.
weird macro that resulted in error messages referring to e.g. "cl__member" instead of cl:member. It interned a symbol, so this could cause package lock problems, on top of being ugly. It might be possible to get the lisp symbol based off of __FUNCTION__, but I think that would be error-prone.
more usual lisp naming
separate user and system locks are probably unnecessary anyway
Eventually this should be expanded to something like SBCL's "implementation packages". In any case this allows things like cando and the static analyzer to build using clasp-builder. (Cando has some actual package lock violations, though.)
uint16_t basically so I don't need to teach the analyzer about uint8_t. Plus it's future proof if we need four more flags somehow.
This parallel search code seems to assume that it's being loaded through the clasp-builder, but this is not necessarily the case, and in fact isn't the case with how we usually use the analyzer now - this code is rotten. Instead let's just use the previously unused parameter. The reference to *number-of-jobs* breaks with package locks on, since without clasp-builder the symbol doesn't even exist, let alone the variable.
SBCL has a separate system package thing for some reason, so I'll keep that bit around. This commit also makes the flag constants static. Oops!
mimicking SBCL's names, which are better anyway.
this is an external interface, so i think locking it is important
like SBCL's. and way less awkward
Another exported interface.
and let these things accept lists
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Adding package locks like SBCL's. Based on #1608.