Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 28 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Sign upcmd/vet: Add check for channels that must be buffered #9399
Comments
ianlancetaylor
added
the
repo-tools
label
Dec 19, 2014
rsc
added this to the Unplanned milestone
Apr 10, 2015
rsc
changed the title from
cmd/vet: Add check for channels that must be buffered
to
x/tools/cmd/vet: Add check for channels that must be buffered
Apr 14, 2015
rsc
modified the milestones:
Unreleased,
Unplanned
Apr 14, 2015
rsc
removed
the
repo-tools
label
Apr 14, 2015
mvdan
changed the title from
x/tools/cmd/vet: Add check for channels that must be buffered
to
cmd/vet: Add check for channels that must be buffered
May 31, 2018
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
titanous commentedDec 19, 2014
There are at least two places in the standard library where channels must have a non-zero buffer in order for the program to be correct:
os.Signalchannels passed tosignal.Notify.*rpc.Callchannels passed toClient.Goinnet/rpc.I propose a vet check that ensures that these channels are buffered.
I took a quick look at @rsc's pubgo dataset (circa early 2013), and in the code that compiles, I found 161 calls to
make(chan os.Signal)of which 61 were unbuffered. I do not have a newer dataset handy (is there one?) but I think it's reasonable to guess that the ratio in newer code would not have changed significantly.I currently have a vet check written that ensures that all calls to
make(os.Signal)have a non-zero buffer, but this check seems a bit too simplistic, as there may be uses for these channels that do not require a buffer. I think it's safer to require buffered channels to be passed into the mentioned calls. However, I'm not familiar enough with the relevant packages to understand what the best approach for this is.This was originally discussed on the mailing list.