Objectify: warn if Is{Component,Positional}ObjectRep absent #4964
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
fingolfin
force-pushed
the
mh/force-pos-or-com-objrep
branch
2 times, most recently
from
0117526
to
2f4cc99
Compare
This was referenced Dec 15, 2022
fingolfin
force-pushed
the
mh/force-pos-or-com-objrep
branch
from
2f4cc99
to
2d07ffc
Compare
|
Hmm, thinking about it, I am not even sure why to warn -- instead we could just add that flag? Perhaps for performance reasons: a missing flag that has to be added in requires us to create a new sub-type... |
fingolfin
commented
Oct 25, 2024
Comment on lines
+605
to
+606
| #Assert(0, IS_SUBSET_FLAGS(flags, FLAGS_FILTER(IsPositionalObjectRep))); | ||
| Assert(0, not IS_SUBSET_FLAGS(flags, FLAGS_FILTER(IsComponentObjectRep))); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe disable this by default, but have it enabled e.g. in most test suites (as long as the use START_TEST)?
Suggested change
| #Assert(0, IS_SUBSET_FLAGS(flags, FLAGS_FILTER(IsPositionalObjectRep))); | |
| Assert(0, not IS_SUBSET_FLAGS(flags, FLAGS_FILTER(IsComponentObjectRep))); | |
| #Assert(1, IS_SUBSET_FLAGS(flags, FLAGS_FILTER(IsPositionalObjectRep))); | |
| Assert(1, not IS_SUBSET_FLAGS(flags, FLAGS_FILTER(IsComponentObjectRep))); |
fingolfin
commented
Oct 25, 2024
Comment on lines
+613
to
+614
| #Assert(0, IS_SUBSET_FLAGS(flags, FLAGS_FILTER(IsComponentObjectRep))); | ||
| Assert(0, not IS_SUBSET_FLAGS(flags, FLAGS_FILTER(IsPositionalObjectRep))); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| #Assert(0, IS_SUBSET_FLAGS(flags, FLAGS_FILTER(IsComponentObjectRep))); | |
| Assert(0, not IS_SUBSET_FLAGS(flags, FLAGS_FILTER(IsPositionalObjectRep))); | |
| #Assert(1, IS_SUBSET_FLAGS(flags, FLAGS_FILTER(IsComponentObjectRep))); | |
| Assert(1, not IS_SUBSET_FLAGS(flags, FLAGS_FILTER(IsPositionalObjectRep))); |
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.
This works towards resolving #1043: now
Objectifywarns ifIsPositionalObjectRepresp.IsComponentObjectRepis not set for an object that should have one of them; and it also gives an error if both are set / "the wrong one" is set (i.e.IsPositionalObjectRepfor aT_COMOBJorIsComponentObjectRepfor aT_POSOBJ).I've eliminated all the warnings triggered by loading GAP and running
tst/testinstall.g, and submitted gap-packages/fr#50 to fix one violation in a package (I've already fixed a bunch of others in packages in the past couple years). I am guessing there may still be a couple more, so I am reluctant to turn the warnings into an error just now... at the very least, before we attempt such a thing, the test suites of all packages should be run against a GAP with that error activated.Also, before merging this PR we should check how this extra test affects performance:
Objectifyis a bit of a bottleneck, and we don't want to make it worse than it already is...