David Riley Coderon created THRIFT-2131:
-------------------------------------------
Summary: Thrift's D bindings: tutorial code has multiple
correctness issues
Key: THRIFT-2131
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-2131
Project: Thrift
Issue Type: Bug
Components: D - Library
Affects Versions: 0.9
Reporter: David Riley Coderon
Both the client and the async_client in thrift/tutorial/d have correctness
issues, readily apparent from the output of running them against the tutorial
server. Seems to occur even back in dmd 2.061.
{code}
you@myhost:~/pkg/thrift/github-latest-thrift/thrift/tutorial/d$ ./async_client
ping()
1 + 1 = 2
Whoa we can divide by 0 //// <<<<<<<<<<<<<<< problem?
15 - 10 = 5
Check log: 5
you@myhost:~/pkg/thrift/github-latest-thrift/thrift/tutorial/d$ ./client
ping()
1 + 1 = 7036616 ////// <<<<<<<<<<<<<< problem!
Invalid operation: Cannot divide by 0
15 - 10 = 7036616 ////// <<<<<<<<<<<<<< problem!
Check log: 5
you@myhost:~/pkg/thrift/github-latest-thrift/thrift/tutorial/d$ dmd|head
DMD64 D Compiler v2.061
{code}
notes from David N. :
{code}
On 16 Aug 2013, at 19:33, David N wrote:
On 16 Aug 2013, at 19:31, David N wrote:
The async client should definitely throw the exception as well, so
there is definitely something wrong.
I could just reproduce this issue using the second-to-last LDC release on
OS X; will have a short look at it.
Oh, derp, this is actually an issue in the async_client code: Thrift structs
are passed in D as const(ref), and because async requests are executed … well,
asynchronously, overwriting that struct with the (15 - 10) request leads to
that being executed twice.
The transition to pass-by-ref was actually done very late in the development
process, and apparently nobody really had a closer look at the async_client
tutorial output since.
I suppose the proper fix would be to make TAsyncClient accept structs by value,
as the actual requests are (potentially) executed in a different thread and
sharing data via an un-'shared' reference shouldn't really happen in D.
I wonder what to do about the types that are intrinsically reference types
(arrays, …) though. Requiring them to be (tail-)immutable would be one option,
albeit a rather harsh one. I'll need to properly think this through later.
David
{code}
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
