-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 32
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
Implementing thread-operation #93
Comments
Have you considered not using eval but rather first compile the input, then load it in memory (as a thunk) and lastly invoke the thunk? IIUC, the first step is interruptible because it is fully implemented in Scheme. I think that's what the standard Guile REPL does already (maybe 'eval' too)? That said, a glaring omission is that you don't appear to have implemented interruption anywhere -- I don't see thread-terminate! anywhere, so no control-C equivalent. Also later more about the operation itself |
To my understanding, what 'block-fn' needs to do is to ‘asynchronuously’ wait for ‘try-fn’ to potentially succeed (i.e., it needs to in some way do something like join-thread). However, I don't see join-thread anywhere. IIUC, in practical terms, that means Fibers might wait forever as it is never notified that the thread-operation might succeed. |
Also, 'thread-operation' -> 'thread-join-operation' is a clearer name. |
You are busy-looping here, which is bad for efficiency (CPU time/energy). I think I see what causes high-memory usage: you are implementing a (busy) loop by a non-tail recursion! I think most problems will go away by, for both sched and (not sched), doing something like 'join-thread'. But important: make sure it's ‘asynchronous’, because another operation (when using choice-operation) might complete earlier! I don't know any ‘concurrent thread waiting’ procedures, though. |
Have you considered not implementing thread-operation and instead make a condition variable and wrap the thunk of the new thread to signal the condition variable (upon success or otherwise, you can use dynamic-wind's out guard for this)? Less satisfying and less general perhaps, but much more simple and seems to suit your needs. |
I don't see any fundamental problems with implementing interruption of individual fibers -- it seems a matter of $LOTS_OF_WORK. Needs modifications to Fibers itself though. |
You are reimplementing 'sleep-operation' + '(wrap-operation ... (lambda () log stuff))' here. |
@emixa-d I didn't think about using condition variables outside of the fibers, that's actually a very good idea, thank you! Will make something like this: (use-modules (fibers))
(use-modules (fibers channels))
(use-modules (fibers operations))
(use-modules (fibers timers))
(use-modules (fibers conditions))
(use-modules (fibers scheduler))
(use-modules (ice-9 threads))
(use-modules (ice-9 match))
(use-modules (ice-9 atomic))
(use-modules (ice-9 exceptions))
(define (eval-thread code finished-cnd)
(call-with-new-thread
(lambda ()
(dynamic-wind
(lambda () 'hi)
(lambda ()
(let ((res (with-exception-handler
(lambda (exception)
`(exception-value ,exception))
(lambda ()
`(eval-value . ,(primitive-eval code)) )
#:unwind? #t)))
res))
(lambda () (signal-condition! finished-cnd))))))
(define (async-program)
(let ((ch (make-channel))
(cnd (make-condition)))
(spawn-fiber
(lambda ()
(let* ((eval-cnd (make-condition))
(eval-th (eval-thread '(begin (sleep 4) 'some-value) eval-cnd)))
(put-message
ch
(perform-operation
(choice-operation
(wrap-operation
(wait-operation cnd)
(lambda ()
(cancel-thread eval-th)
`(inerrupted . #t)))
(wrap-operation
(wait-operation eval-cnd)
(lambda (. v)
`(thread-value . ,(join-thread eval-th))))))))))
;; sending eval interrupt
(spawn-fiber
(lambda ()
(sleep 5)
(format #t "sending signal\n")
(signal-condition! cnd)))
(get-message ch)))
(format #t "return value: ~a\n"
(run-fibers async-program)) And thank you for other comments too, I found them valuable. I have enough to keep working, will share the results later, probably on guile-users mailing list. |
In a REPL, it would be useful to include a backtrace and not only the exception. display-backtrace / backtrace + call-with-output-string may be useful. |
On 2023-09-02 05:47, emixa-d wrote:
```
(let ((res (with-exception-handler
(lambda (exception)
`(exception-value ,exception))
(lambda ()
`(eval-value . ,(primitive-eval code)) )
#:unwind? #t)))
```
In a REPL, it would be useful to include a backtrace and not only the exception. display-backtrace / backtrace + call-with-output-string may be useful.
Thank you for the tip, I definitely think about it, and will add it
later. If you want you can follow implementation progress here:
https://git.sr.ht/~abcdw/guile-nrepl
At the moment there is no separate mailing list for the project, so
rde-devel can be used.
…--
Best regards,
Andrew Tropin
|
I was working on guile-nrepl (asyncronous network repl for guile) and stumbled upon an issue: we can't do [interruptable] eval inside fiber because it blocks the whole thread until evaluation is complete. So we need to do eval in a separate thread and thus we need to interact with this threads from fibers somehow.
I hacked together an implementation of
thread-operation
and it works great, but because of my lack of knowledge of fibers internals the implementation consumes unreasonable amounts of memory and probably contains some other flaws. Any ideas on a proper implementation of this operation?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: