From: marcandre-ruby-core@... Date: 2020-10-25T20:08:18+00:00 Subject: [ruby-core:100538] [Ruby master Bug#17159] extend `define_method` for Ractor Issue #17159 has been updated by marcandre (Marc-Andre Lafortune). How about: ```ruby define_method(:name, make_shareable: true) { ... } # equivalent to: define_method(:name, &Ractor.make_shareable(Proc.new{...}))` ``` With `make_shareable` as making accessed external variables shareable and not reassignable. ---------------------------------------- Bug #17159: extend `define_method` for Ractor https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/17159#change-88166 * Author: ko1 (Koichi Sasada) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Backport: 2.5: DONTNEED, 2.6: DONTNEED, 2.7: DONTNEED ---------------------------------------- Ractor prohibits use of non-isolated `Proc`s. Non-isolated example is here: ```ruby s = "foo" pr = Proc.new{ p s } ``` This Proc `pr` can not be shared among ractors because outer variable `s` can contain an unshareable object. Also outer binding is a mutable object. Sharing it can lead race conditions. Because of these reasons, `define_method` is also a problem on a multi-Ractor program. (current implementation allows it just because check is not implemented, and it leads BUG). I think there are several patterns when `define_method` is needed. (1) To choose method names on-the-fly ```ruby name = ... define_method(name){ nil } ``` (2) To embed variables to the code ```ruby 10.times{|i| define_method("foo#{i}"){ i } } ``` (3) To use global state by local variables ```ruby cnt = 0 define_method("inc"){ cnt += 1 } ``` (4) Others I can't imagine ---- (1) is easy. We can allow `define_method(name, &Proc{nil}.isolate)`. (3) can never be OK. It introduces data races/race conditions. For this purpose one need to use shared hash. ```ruby STATE = SharedHash.new(cnt: 0) define_method("inc"){ STATE.transaction{ STATE[:cnt] += 1 }} ``` I think there are many (2) patterns that should be saved. To help (2) pattern, the easiest way is to use `eval`. ```ruby 10.times{|i| eval("def foo#{i} #{i}; end") } ``` However, `eval` has several issues (it has huge freedom to explode the program, editor's syntax highlighting and so on). Another approach is to embed the current value to the code, like this: ```ruby i = 0 define_method("foo", ractorise: true){ i } #=> equivalent to: # define_method("foo"){ 0 } # so that if outer scope's i changed, not affected. i = 1 foo #=> 0 s = "" define_method("bar", ractorise: true){ s } #=> equivalent to: # define_method("bar"){ "" } # so that if outer scope's s or s's value, it doesn't affect s << "x" bar #=> "" ``` However, it is very differenct from current Proc semantics. Another idea is to specify embedding value like this: ```ruby i = 0 define_method("foo", i: i){ i } #=> equivalent to: # define_method("foo"){ 0 } # so that if outer scope's i changed, not affected. i = 1 foo #=> 0 s = "" define_method("bar", s: s){ s } #=> equivalent to: # define_method("bar"){ "" } # so that if outer scope's s or s's value, it doesn't affect s << "x" bar #=> "" ``` `i: i` and `s: s` are redundant. However, if there are no outer variable `i` or `s`, the `i` and `s` in blocks are compiled to `send(:i)` or `send(:s)`. But I agree these method invocation should be replaced is another idea. Thoughts? Thanks, Koichi -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: