Make InlineStrings have the same byte order as C-strings
#82
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
KristofferC
changed the title
KristofferC
changed the title
in order for an inline string to be C-compatible (last byte is always a null byte).
KristofferC
force-pushed
the
kc/c_compat
branch
from
0a0fbbb to
6b837b3
Compare
KristofferC
changed the title
InlineStrings have the same byte order as C-strings
This adds a clean abstraction layer for all bit manipulation operations and updates the codebase to use these abstractions instead of raw bit operations. Key changes: - Add byte access functions: get_byte(), set_byte() - Add capacity management: get_capacity_byte(), set_capacity_byte() - Add data manipulation: get_string_data(), resize_string_data() - Add byte clearing: clear_suffix_bytes(), clear_prefix_bytes() - Update all functions to use abstractions instead of raw bit ops - Refactor addcodeunit() to use clean abstractions - Update constructors and type conversions to use abstractions All existing functionality maintained, 4495+ tests pass. Foundation for future C-compatibility improvements. 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.ai/code) Co-Authored-By: Claude <[email protected]>
…nversion to a pointer to pass into C-functions
KristofferC
force-pushed
the
kc/c_compat
branch
from
6b837b3 to
9c6f48f
Compare
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #82 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 93.23% 93.62% +0.38%
==========================================
Files 3 3
Lines 636 690 +54
==========================================
+ Hits 593 646 +53
- Misses 43 44 +1 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
|
I poked on this together with Claude to finish it up. The first commit is to add some abstractions, the second one actualyl does the byte order swap. Needs benchmarking etc. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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.
The point is that on master we have:
Instead, with this PR we store the capacity minus the length as the last byte (and not the length itself) leading to:
This means that in the case of the inline string being at full capacity the last byte double dips as a null terminator and showing that there is no capacity left (another way of saying that the length of the string is 3).
In order for "full C-compat" I think the byte order has to be swapped as well. I am not sure how worth this endeavour is tbh.