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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Improved traphandler code #2318
Improved traphandler code #2318
Changes from 1 commit
f16d085
1c6995d
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
So I like this, but lets make sure the new semantics are what we intended. In the old code, calling
set_trap_handler
would globally update the trap handler in allStore
s. In the new code it only updates the trap handler for this specific store (and StoresClone
d from it). All the old trap handlers will continue to work here because they're kept alive by theArc
. (This is actually a great example of how using the raw pointer could have caused problems, the momentset
is called again, the trap handler being used could have been invalid.)If the move from
Store
's having 1 trap handler toStore
s having N trap handlers in a tree-like structure is intentional then 👍 , if not then we probably need to rethink some of this.And if this is intentional we may want to call it out more in the doc comments.
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.
Also side note but if you want to remove the extra
Box
inArc<Option<Box<TrapHandler<'static>>>
let me know, I think it should be possible to do so in many cases.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 agree with the first comment :-).