search for: closure

This change does not affect the output of the generator. Note this requires that all Closure args have the same parameter name whichever method they appear in. An alternate refactoring could work the same way as Flags and Enum where the parameter name is part of the arg, eg: type arg = ... | Closure of string * closure (* name, type *) ... "set_debug_callback", {...

On 7/24/19 7:17 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > In preparation for closure lifetimes, split up the Closure so it no > longer describes a list of closures, but a single callback. > > This changes the API because functions which take 2 or more closures > now pass a separate user_data for each one. > --- > docs/libnbd.pod | 3 +- >...

Previously closures had a crude flag which tells if they are persistent or transient. Transient closures (flag = false) last for the lifetime of the currently called libnbd function. Persistent closures had an indefinite lifetime which could last for as long as the handle. In language bindings handling persistent...

This implements most of what I wrote here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2019-July/msg00213.html

In preparation for closure lifetimes, split up the Closure so it no longer describes a list of closures, but a single callback. This changes the API because functions which take 2 or more closures now pass a separate user_data for each one. --- docs/libnbd.pod | 3 +- examples/strict-structured-reads....

A somewhat random question: I'm wondering if there's any kind of trick in LLVM that would allow me to implement closures efficiently. We can assume that a closure function has a hidden parameter which points to its environment, that is, the values of the variables which were in scope at the point where the closure function was defined. The problem comes when mixing closure and non-closure functions, because clo...

On 7/16/19 6:04 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > A Closure is a list of (usually one, but can be more) closures. In C > there is also a singe ‘void *user_data’ parameter which is passed by > the caller into the function and through as the first parameter of > each callback invocation. > > By grouping the previously separate Opaque and Call...

Previously closures had a crude flag which tells if they are persistent or transient. Transient closures (flag = false) last for the lifetime of the currently called libnbd function. Persistent closures had an indefinite lifetime which could last for as long as the handle. In language bindings handling persistent...

v1 was here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2019-July/thread.html#00231 The changes address everything that Eric picked up in his review of the first two patches. I have also added two more patches (4 and 5) which respectively fix docs and change int status -> unsigned status, as discussed. Passes make, check, check-valgrind. Rich.

On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 10:02:04AM -0500, Eric Blake wrote: > On 7/24/19 7:17 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > In preparation for closure lifetimes, split up the Closure so it no > > longer describes a list of closures, but a single callback. > > > > This changes the API because functions which take 2 or more closures > > now pass a separate user_data for each one. > > --- > > docs/libnbd.pod...

Previously closures had a crude flag which tells if they are persistent or transient. Transient closures (flag = false) last for the lifetime of the currently called libnbd function. Persistent closures had an indefinite lifetime which could last for as long as the handle. In language bindings handling persistent...

Patches 1-4 are basically uncontroversial, straightforward refactoring and IMHO we should just push them. Possibly 1-3 should be squashed together, but I posted them separately so they are easier to review. Patches 5 and 6 together implement OClosure. Patch 5 adds the feature and is simple to understand. Patch 6 changes the Closure completion callbacks into OClosure, but because it doesn't change the position within the list of arguments the C API doesn't change at all. The Python API also doesn't change for the same reason. (Th...

On 7/24/19 7:17 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > Previously closures had a crude flag which tells if they are > persistent or transient. Transient closures (flag = false) last for > the lifetime of the currently called libnbd function. Persistent > closures had an indefinite lifetime which could last for as long as > the handle. In language bindings...

Hi all, In getting to know the LLVM infrastructure, I'm having a hard time finding implementation details for closures and continuations. For closures, I've read comments such as "using a struct" as an environment to hold references to free variables, linked lists to dictionaries for various scope levels, and even things like "it's just like virtual methods". I have a couple of questi...

I think I've addressed everything that was raised in review. Some of the highlights: - Callbacks should be freed reliably along all exit paths. - There's a simple test of closure lifetimes. - I've tried to use VALID|FREE in all the places where I'm confident that it's safe and correct to do. There may be more places. Note this is an optimization and shouldn't affect correctness. - It's a bit difficult to use VALID|FREE when freeing the debug...

On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 7:51 PM, David Farler <accumulator at icloud.com>wrote: > Hi all, > > In getting to know the LLVM infrastructure, I'm having a hard time finding > implementation details for closures and continuations. > > For closures, I've read comments such as "using a struct" as an > environment to hold references to free variables, linked lists to > dictionaries for various scope levels, and even things like "it's just like > virtual methods". I...

The "R Language Definition" at http://cran.r-project.org/doc/manuals/R-lang.html states in the following section 4.3.2 Argument matching This subsection applies to closures but not to primitive functions. What are 'closures'? [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

...cts the target's C calling convention. But I'm trying to > see if other types of languages can be implemented using LLVM. Sure they can. :) > > What is that you are looking to express that isn't captured by the > > `call' instruction? > > > > Tail calls, closures, continuations, lazy allocation... Basically I'm > trying to see how am I going to implement high-level functions on LLVM. As for tail calls, my plans are here: http://nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/GuaranteedEfficientTailCalls.txt Note that LLVM already has a pretty aggressive tail-call elimi...

So I read the Kaleidoscope tutorial, big thanks to Chris Latter. Good pace, still excellent coverage. Just at the end it mentions closures and I was wondering how those are done in llvm. The link was to wikipedia, and i do know what closures/blocks/continuations are, (i think) but maybe someone could point me to where to read about how to do them in llvm. Thanks Torsten

...able (which obviously should have limited scope). I already figured out how to plot the means, but without limiting their precision to 2 decimal places. This is the code I used once I had the scatterplot drawn: text(c(1990, 1992, 1994, 1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003), 25, mean.yrly.closures$values, cex=.7) It's a plot of school closures by Year. The closures variable is labeled "values" in the "mean.yrly.closures" data set. I managed to *display* the mean.yrly.closures data set with a precision of 2 decimal places (options(digits=2)), but then once I pl...