[ji] package (internal) refactoring #3754

kares · 2016-03-22T13:59:24Z

mostly some cleanup around JavaPackageTemplate which is replaced by a native JavaPackage

... allows for pieces to stay at one place - and avoid 'hacks' such as setting @package_name.

compatibility should be fine, I see too (minor) "breaking" changes :

java.lang.class will return Java::JavaPackage instead of Module (believe this is for the better)
was thinking about exposing more methods (with the BlankSlateWrapper hack) on packages, but for now I hold this back (left them commented) :
- singleton_class since class and name work as expected and its very low risk to collide
- throw, catch as those are Java keywords packages couldn't use those names
SOME (FUTURE) IDEAS :
we might allow packages to behave like a Ruby object (with a -Xji switch) - no method filtering
for conflicting package names - method access wouldn't work but constant access still might :

e.g. org.jruby.test.name.MyClass 🔴 (due name) but org::jruby::test::name::MyClass 🍏 but maybe its not such a good idea - let me know what are your thoughts on that. currently users need to resort to Java::OrgJrubyTestName::... or java_import 'org.jruby.test.name' in such cases.

numbers show performance is around the same if not better on some runs :

9.0.5.

Rehearsal ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Java::java::lang [5000000x]                     2.680000   1.000000   3.680000 (  2.475752)
org.ietf.jgss [5000000x]                        1.590000   0.040000   1.630000 (  1.327823)
org.xml.sax.helpers.DefaultHandler [5000000x]   1.560000   0.060000   1.620000 (  1.479342)
Java.pkg0...pkg9 5000000x]                      0.710000   0.000000   0.710000 (  0.590146)
------------------------------------------------------------------------ total: 7.640000sec

                                                    user     system      total        real
Java::java::lang [5000000x]                     1.320000   0.000000   1.320000 (  1.303038)
org.ietf.jgss [5000000x]                        1.380000   0.020000   1.400000 (  1.379260)
org.xml.sax.helpers.DefaultHandler [5000000x]   1.560000   0.040000   1.600000 (  1.531264)
Java.pkg0...pkg9 5000000x]                      0.500000   0.000000   0.500000 (  0.495313)

9.1.0

Rehearsal ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Java::java::lang [5000000x]                     2.440000   0.440000   2.880000 (  1.788888)
org.ietf.jgss [5000000x]                        1.490000   0.300000   1.790000 (  1.462861)
org.xml.sax.helpers.DefaultHandler [5000000x]   1.270000   0.330000   1.600000 (  1.497588)
Java.pkg0...pkg9 5000000x]                      0.580000   0.000000   0.580000 (  0.426573)
------------------------------------------------------------------------ total: 6.850000sec

                                                    user     system      total        real
Java::java::lang [5000000x]                     1.100000   0.110000   1.210000 (  1.175431)
org.ietf.jgss [5000000x]                        1.310000   0.100000   1.410000 (  1.224360)
org.xml.sax.helpers.DefaultHandler [5000000x]   1.130000   0.170000   1.300000 (  1.272022)
Java.pkg0...pkg9 5000000x]                      0.380000   0.000000   0.380000 (  0.352696)

enebo · 2016-03-22T16:05:40Z

Since JavaPackage extends Module I do not see this change as one which could possibly break anything (knock on wood).

I am interested in an enumerated list of package names which would be invalid before and after the change. At a minimum, having a list like this would be great for documentation.

module JavaPackageModuleTemplate disappears from Java since it is private but you also remove the Ruby version as well. I wonder if anyone in the wild uses this (perhaps alias JavaPackage to this just in case?).

I know you did not do this based on diff but there are many method calls which are prefixed with 'this.'. If you want to kill those that would be nice.

You changed visibilty of method_missing and const_missing to private which I think is correct but I am just mentioning it in case someone knows why non-private would still be needed or could cause problems.

All-in-all I have no issues with the PR itself my only question would be to challenge which behavior could have possibly changed which will generate an issue report.

kares · 2016-03-22T16:23:48Z

I am interested in an enumerated list of package names which would be invalid before and after the change. At a minimum, having a list like this would be great for documentation.

as noted in the desc it stayed the same (for now) except for :
- singleton_class since class and name work as expected and its very low risk to collide
- throw, catch as those are Java keywords packages couldn't use those names

so really only singleton_class would be prohibited after the merge with package method access

module JavaPackageModuleTemplate disappears from Java since it is private but you also remove the Ruby version as well. I wonder if anyone in the wild uses this (perhaps alias JavaPackage to this just in case?).

will look into some github usage if anyone has done something of a kind. if not I'll leave it dead as is.

I know you did not do this based on diff but there are many method calls which are prefixed with 'this.'. If you want to kill those that would be nice.

NP - will do, thanks.

You changed visibilty of method_missing and const_missing to private which I think is correct but I am just mentioning it in case someone knows why non-private would still be needed or could cause problems.

yeah I noticed that and fixed in a follow-up commit: 744bf4e ... so this should be the same as it was.

with makeMetaClass - previous package module meta-class attaching ... should no longer be necessary

… methods

…bled)

- `pkg.name` has been working since 1.7.22/9.0.1.0 (#2468) - handling :object_id as it is quite surprising to not have - can handle :throw/:catch since they're not valid package names - commented-out methods that would be good to have as well

…re 'java'`

… names)

…g a package)

and assert that `pkg.object_id` works as expected!

…pected

kares · 2016-03-22T16:58:56Z

~~people actually seems to use JavaPackageModuleTemplate for some "hacks"~~ ... will need to understand what they're doing and likely setup a deprecated alias.

addressed the rest and squashed some of the commits for more clarity.

UPDATE: so those are all copies of old JRuby's stdlib files - no usage found really.

…bility ... its probably fine to remove - but just in case

… right ... also restored singleton method hooks for compatibility with previous versions

kares · 2016-04-06T06:38:04Z

for the record - dealing with the introduced proxy class initialization regression: f1280b1

enebo · 2016-04-06T14:57:50Z

@kares can this get cherry-picked to 1.7 also?

kares · 2016-04-06T15:08:21Z

@enebo these (package) changes are not there -- thus makes no sense, or does it 😸 ?
jruby-1_7 shouldn't have had issues with the proxy initialization if so its due something else ...

enebo · 2016-04-06T17:46:12Z

@kares oh...yeah I don't know why it is happening then. I figured it was the same issue. Weird that both branches have the same failing test.

kares · 2016-04-12T06:20:04Z

// cc @Lan5432 - sorry forgot, its been merged already but could be interesting to learn some JI internals

Lan5432 · 2016-04-12T12:33:17Z

Yeah, I will take a look into the commits and the discussion. Thanks anyways, I know the 9.1 release is an important task

kares added java integration JRuby 9000 labels Mar 22, 2016

kares added this to the JRuby 9.1.0.0 milestone Mar 22, 2016

kares added 19 commits March 22, 2016 17:40

adjust const_get-ers + override storeConstant to skip name validation

b899bfc

handle Java package module const_get regression - should handle sub-pkgs

d806532

remove deprecated un-used methods in ::Java

999f9fe

rename internal ClassProvider impl + dispatch to delegate Java.getxxx…

a489792

… methods

store 'invalid' constants in Java package modules (validation is disa…

3769acd

…bled)

inline BlankStateWrapper as a private class where it's actually used

82af8af

fail (as before) with arguments given to pkg names + more behavior specs

e4125f3

get Java package's blank-slate-wrapper actually working (as it was)

c0bb0b0

avoid regexp pattern matching on Java package's (custom) method search

6d816ba

rspec.should interfering - what a "great" idea to test this with rxxxx!

682549b

remove unused java-support .rb ... these files are internal to `requi…

772e6b1

…re 'java'`

share raise ArgumentError on package method accessor args.length > 0

644fb8b

package.class is no longer Module but JavaPackage (~which is a Module)

8d3979f

skip all constant name validation in Java package (storing lower-case…

7e757a8

… names)

[test] adjust expected error message and add some more asserts (pp-in…

d93aa2e

…g a package)

[test] how packages behave when a method collides (e.g. on pkg.name)

d975f4c

and assert that `pkg.object_id` works as expected!

[test] assert that Java package's class/singleton_class behaves as ex…

80966be

…pected

kares force-pushed the ji-package-refactor branch from 8ece95a to 80966be Compare March 22, 2016 16:53

kares added 2 commits March 23, 2016 10:50

[ji] keep (deprecated) JavaPackageModuleTemplate constant for compati…

f226b78

…bility ... its probably fine to remove - but just in case

[ji] packages shall try to handle respond_to? and respond_to_missing?…

4036c08

… right ... also restored singleton method hooks for compatibility with previous versions

kares merged commit ae94c39 into master Mar 29, 2016

kares deleted the ji-package-refactor branch September 7, 2016 04:43

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

GitHub Sponsors

[ji] package (internal) refactoring #3754

[ji] package (internal) refactoring #3754

kares commented Mar 22, 2016

enebo commented Mar 22, 2016

kares commented Mar 22, 2016

kares commented Mar 22, 2016

kares commented Apr 6, 2016

enebo commented Apr 6, 2016

kares commented Apr 6, 2016

enebo commented Apr 6, 2016

kares commented Apr 12, 2016

Lan5432 commented Apr 12, 2016

[ji] package (internal) refactoring #3754

[ji] package (internal) refactoring #3754

Conversation

kares commented Mar 22, 2016

enebo commented Mar 22, 2016

kares commented Mar 22, 2016

kares commented Mar 22, 2016

kares commented Apr 6, 2016

enebo commented Apr 6, 2016

kares commented Apr 6, 2016

enebo commented Apr 6, 2016

kares commented Apr 12, 2016

Lan5432 commented Apr 12, 2016