Define state consistency within a revision #223

zetanumbers · 2020-12-14T22:42:02Z

Update dependencies;
Update documentation;
Create formal definition in the docs;
Add new "strong" tests.

codecov · 2020-12-29T09:00:39Z

Codecov Report

Merging #223 (cfa7bec) into main (4d14a31) will decrease coverage by 0.54%.
The diff coverage is 42.36%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #223      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   27.78%   27.24%   -0.55%     
==========================================
  Files          50       50              
  Lines       11886    11729     -157     
  Branches     6634     6564      -70     
==========================================
- Hits         3303     3195     -108     
- Misses       6391     6446      +55     
+ Partials     2192     2088     -104

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
dom/examples/todo/src/filter.rs	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
dom/examples/todo/src/item.rs	`23.29% <ø> (+1.04%)`	⬆️
src/runtime/runloop.rs	`68.42% <0.00%> (-4.92%)`	⬇️
src/runtime/context.rs	`37.70% <13.04%> (-18.75%)`	⬇️
src/runtime/var.rs	`24.13% <17.64%> (-23.49%)`	⬇️
src/runtime.rs	`23.67% <45.45%> (-0.77%)`	⬇️
src/lib.rs	`38.98% <80.00%> (-1.26%)`	⬇️
mox/src/lib.rs	`0.00% <0.00%> (-40.00%)`	⬇️
benches/core.rs	`75.00% <0.00%> (-15.00%)`	⬇️
dom/examples/ssr/src/main.rs	`28.81% <0.00%> (-8.48%)`	⬇️
... and 14 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 4d14a31...cfa7bec. Read the comment docs.

anp

Sorry it took so long to get to this! I like this approach a lot, although I have some questions about the public API it exposes -- see my review comments.

anp · 2021-01-04T22:53:39Z

src/runtime/runloop.rs

@@ -25,6 +25,9 @@ impl super::Runtime {
    where
        Root: FnMut() -> Out,
    {
+        // RunLoop always forces it's first revision?
+        // or maybe just check if current revision is 0
+        self.force();


If it's possible to remove the force() API, I'd prefer that. It's an additional branch at the top of each revision but I don't think this code isn't hot enough to care about that overhead.

anp · 2021-01-04T22:54:34Z

src/runtime/runloop.rs

+    /// Runs the root closure once with access to the runtime context, returning
+    /// the result. `Waker` is set for the next `Revision`, which starts after
+    /// the start of the run.
+    pub fn run_once_with(&mut self, waker: Waker) -> Out {


Is it possible to make this the only API? Is there a reason we still need to cache the waker and support running without one?

anp · 2021-01-04T22:55:16Z

src/runtime.rs

    /// which is probably the desired behavior if the embedding system will
    /// call `Runtime::run_once` on a regular interval regardless.
-    pub fn set_state_change_waker(&mut self, wk: Waker) {
-        self.wk = wk;
+    pub fn set_state_change_waker(&mut self, waker: Waker) {


At one point we discussed removing this altogether in favor of deleting run_once and having run_once_with take a waker -- is that still an option here?

anp · 2021-01-04T22:58:28Z

src/runtime.rs

+        rcs_write.revision.0 += 1;
+        rcs_write.pending_changes.store(false, std::sync::atomic::Ordering::Relaxed);
+        drop(rcs_write);


Could you extract this to a separate method like RevisionController::increment_revision? It'll make calls to execute() a little more verbose but we'll never risk blocking writes to state variables if something changes here, because the write guard can't escape the controller's method body.

anp · 2021-01-04T23:00:30Z

src/runtime.rs

@@ -41,6 +43,13 @@ impl std::fmt::Debug for Revision {
    }
 }

+#[derive(Debug)]
+pub(crate) struct RevisionControlSystem {


nit: RevisionController

Can you move this type to another file, src/runtime/controller.rs?

anp · 2021-01-04T23:21:35Z

src/runtime/var.rs

+        let rcs_read = self.rcs.read();
+        let current = rcs_read.revision;


Suggested change

let rcs_read = self.rcs.read();

let current = rcs_read.revision;

let current = rcs.revision();

anp · 2021-01-04T23:21:58Z

src/runtime/var.rs

+
+    /// Returns a reference to the current commit.
+    pub fn current_commit(&mut self) -> &Commit<State> {
+        let current = self.rcs.read().revision;


Suggested change

let current = self.rcs.read().revision;

let current = self.rcs.revision();

anp · 2021-01-04T23:24:43Z

dom/examples/todo/src/filter.rs

@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ pub fn filter_link(to_set: Visibility) -> Li {
    mox! {
        <li>
            <a style="cursor: pointer;"
-             class={if *visibility == to_set { "selected" } else { "" }}
+             class={if *visibility.commit_at_root() == to_set { "selected" } else { "" }}


We shouldn't need to acquire a lock here to get the visibility for the revision, but I think this is a problem for you because of my past laziness.

At the top of this function is this attribute:

#[illicit::from_env(visibility: &Key<Visibility>)]

I think this needs to become

#[illicit::from_env(visibility: &Commit<Visibility>, set_visibility: &Key<Visibility>)]

Which will require exposing the current commit via https://github.com/anp/moxie/blob/main/dom/examples/todo/src/lib.rs#L53 as well.

anp · 2021-01-04T23:26:14Z

dom/examples/todo/src/item.rs

@@ -97,7 +97,8 @@ mod tests {
    pub async fn single_item() {
        let root = document().create_element("div");
        crate::App::boot_fn(&[Todo::new("weeeee")], root.clone(), || {
-            let todo = &illicit::expect::<Key<Vec<Todo>>>()[0];
+            let todos_key = &illicit::expect::<Key<Vec<Todo>>>();
+            let todo = &todos_key.commit_at_root()[0];


Similarly to my other comment, I think we need to pass down a Commit<Vec<Todo>> from the App.

anp · 2021-01-04T23:27:21Z

dom/examples/todo/src/main_section.rs

@@ -35,8 +35,8 @@ pub fn toggle(default_checked: bool) -> Span {
 #[illicit::from_env(todos: &Key<Vec<Todo>>, visibility: &Key<Visibility>)]
 pub fn todo_list() -> Ul {


See my comments in other todomvc files, I think if you add Commit<Visibility> and Commit<Vec<Todo>> to the illicit environment then you can avoid all the commit_at_root calls in this file.

anp · 2021-01-04T23:31:02Z

A question: would this change be easier if RevisionControlState used an AtomicU64 to track the revision number rather than the Revision type itself?

Removed `commit_at_root` field of the `Key` bc of it being out of date.

increments, commits from the past revisions are lazely commited at first measurement

zetanumbers force-pushed the runtime_consistency branch from c0189ab to 1919a88 Compare December 25, 2020 08:58

zetanumbers mentioned this pull request Dec 26, 2020

Add web features to the parking_lot dependency #225

Closed

zetanumbers marked this pull request as ready for review December 26, 2020 15:05

zetanumbers changed the title ~~Reconsideration of the runtime logic~~ Define state consistency within a revision Dec 28, 2020

zetanumbers force-pushed the runtime_consistency branch from aef6d2c to 4dfb658 Compare December 29, 2020 08:20

zetanumbers mentioned this pull request Dec 29, 2020

Fix RunLoop behavior as an async Stream #216

Closed

zetanumbers force-pushed the runtime_consistency branch from b368d34 to 6febf59 Compare January 3, 2021 18:07

anp reviewed Jan 4, 2021

View reviewed changes

zetanumbers added 7 commits January 5, 2021 17:00

Initial fix of anp#197 anp#215 anp#220 anp#222 for moxie crate

772c697

Rollback public API

a51a0e6

Rollback Defer implementation for Key

b3fe8c3

Add poll_once for Runloop

167efaa

Docs update

9100c8d

Removed Deref implementation for Key;

ef032ec

Removed `commit_at_root` field of the `Key` bc of it being out of date.

Fix Var's commits so that after Revision

cfa7bec

increments, commits from the past revisions are lazely commited at first measurement

zetanumbers force-pushed the runtime_consistency branch from 6febf59 to cfa7bec Compare January 5, 2021 14:00

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Define state consistency within a revision #223

Define state consistency within a revision #223

zetanumbers commented Dec 14, 2020 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Dec 29, 2020 •

edited

Loading

anp left a comment

anp Jan 4, 2021

anp Jan 4, 2021

anp Jan 4, 2021

anp Jan 4, 2021

anp Jan 4, 2021

anp Jan 4, 2021

anp Jan 4, 2021

anp Jan 4, 2021

anp Jan 4, 2021

anp Jan 4, 2021

anp commented Jan 4, 2021

		let rcs_read = self.rcs.read();
		let current = rcs_read.revision;

	let rcs_read = self.rcs.read();
	let current = rcs_read.revision;
	let current = rcs.revision();

	let current = self.rcs.read().revision;
	let current = self.rcs.revision();

		@@ -35,8 +35,8 @@ pub fn toggle(default_checked: bool) -> Span {
		#[illicit::from_env(todos: &Key<Vec<Todo>>, visibility: &Key<Visibility>)]
		pub fn todo_list() -> Ul {

Define state consistency within a revision #223

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Define state consistency within a revision #223

Conversation

zetanumbers commented Dec 14, 2020 • edited Loading

codecov bot commented Dec 29, 2020 • edited Loading

Codecov Report

anp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

anp commented Jan 4, 2021

zetanumbers commented Dec 14, 2020 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Dec 29, 2020 •

edited

Loading