mask (which the uncancelable we're discussing)
restore
@djspiewak
well like I said, I'm more than happy to share the prototype experiment results, design notes, and open questions if people are interested in taking a whack at it :-) PRs very much welcome. If no one else gets to it in the coming months, I'm sure I or someone else will implement it in the 2.x timeline
I would love to try it. I want to have it in Monix but I feel a little bit powerless, not even knowing how to start. :D I have a plenty of free time though and I'm familiar with internals. I would be happy to attempt it for cats.effect.IO first and then port to Monix. I don't get my hopes up but at the very least I might learn something in the process
object IORepl {
implicit class IOOps[A](io: IO[A]) extends AnyVal {
def yolo: A = io.unsafeRunSync()
}
implicit val ec: ExecutionContext = ExecutionContext.global
implicit val timer: Timer[IO] = IO.timer(ec)
implicit val cs: ContextShift[IO] = IO.contextShift(ec)
}
import IORepl._ def run(args: List[String]) = ExitCode.Success.pure[IO]object Playground extends IOApp {
def run(args: List[String]) = ExitCode.Success.pure[IO]
implicit class Runner[A](s: Stream[IO, A]) {
def yolo: Unit = s.compile.drain.unsafeRunSync
def yoloV: Vector[A] = s.compile.toVector.unsafeRunSync
}
// put("hello").to[F]
def put[A](a: A): IO[Unit] = IO(println(a))
}val blocker = Blocker.etc(global)
@Avasil Here are my notes! https://gist.github.com/c0e731eefd0cc8c82bbbfd9197d08474 Again, massive credit to @rossabaker for doing all the real legwork on figuring this stuff out and benchmarking it. I basically just distilled and came up with some requirements.
So the raw mechanics of how you get the trace boils down to new Throwable().getStackTrace(), which will give you an Array[StackTraceElement]. That's where the easy part ends. Doing this is very expensive, and you need to do it eagerly inside the definition of flatMap, map, delay, and async (at a minimum). Naively implemented, this would result in a lot of overhead every time you call these functions.
So the idea is to not do it naively. If you call getClass on the Function1 passed to flatMap/map, you're going to get something which is reflective of the definition site of the function passed to the method in question. Note that there are some caveats with this:
val f: Int => Boolean = _ % 2 == 0
ioa.map(f)
.map(f)If you trace that with this technique, both map calls will have the same "call site". I really think that's fine though, and arguably even more useful than the alternative. Anyway…
You need to figure out which stack frame entry actually represents the tru call site, and this is where things get very tricky with Cats Effect because the f in question may be threaded through some other methods, such as monad transformers, libraries like fs2, etc. My spec suggests applying some heuristics to the name of the class you get from the Function1 to take an educated guess, and then go with first best fit. Note that these heuristics can be somewhat expensive at runtime if you need them to be, because you're only doing it once!
Use the Class as a cache key in a global (static) cache. Note that the size of this cache is bounded by the number of distinct call sites in the program, which is not really that many when you think about it. Cache misses are expensive, but they only happen once. Cache lookups are very, very fast. Note that ConcurrentHashMap is heavily read-optimized. The spec references a "slug" mode to tracing, which would basically disable caching entirely. The reason to disable caching is so that you can capture more than one stack frame, which would allow us to give really robust traces when people really need to dig into things. Like we can say things like, "the last few constructors which generated this IO were this map, which had this stack trace, and this flatMap, which had this other stack trace, etc". I imagine this being printed as like a nested bullet list, but hopefully you see where I'm going with this. Slug mode would have a lot of overhead and obviously would only be used when debugging in a dev environment, but that's still really useful! And giving these kinds of robust traces would eliminate the information loss that we would otherwise suffer from with just a single stack frame per call site.
Trace information should be stored in the IO constructors themselves, which avoids the need to maintain a separate data structure representing a "backtrace". In a sense, it's abusing ArrayStack to represent the trace indirectly. This is cool, but unfortunately Map fusion completely defeats it. I note this in my spec, and I have hypothesized that map fusion in IO is entirely pointless in practice and probably doesn't result in any measurable performance gains. Turning it off in IO and then running a sophisticated benchmark suite (like fs2's or Monix's) on top of IO without map fusion, and then again with, should be sufficient evidence to decide. If we can't remove map fusion, then (annoyingly!) we either need to have a separate nested stack structure inside of the IOMap node, or we need to only trace the top-most fused map. Either is probably okay, but not as nice as the unfused alternative. Needs measuring.
@Avasil The biggest problem with all this is configuration. You can't just thread its configuration through the runloop because some of these calls happen before the IO is actually running. (for example, val ioa = pure(42).flatMap(f), the flatMap call site must run before the IO starts executing) So that kicks out some things, unfortunately. ZIO does this nice thing where they have like a notrace function or something (I can't remember what it's called) which presumably threads through the run loop, but there's no possible way it can disable tracing for val examples like this one.
So my spec proposes a two-pronged solution: runloop-threaded configuration, with global defaults set by a system property. So you can still disable tracing entirely if you need to, but the default way you interact with it is via the runloop based configuration (which has nice lexical properties and a better API).
@Avasil Oh, one final bit of trickiness: you can't call getClass on a thunked value in Scala and expect to get the class of the thunk, which is what you need. For example, to trace delay or >>. So you're probably going to need to implement a tiny helper in Java that has the class metadata to trick scalac into passing the thunk along without evaluation. In other words, what scalac does when it sees the following:
def foo(s: => String) = bar(s)
def bar(s: => String) = ...bar gets the raw thunk that was passed to foo, without re-wrapping. If you can define bar in Java, then you can take that thunk (which will be of type scala.Function0) and call getClass on it without forcing. You don't have that option in Scala, since calling s.getClass will force the thunk and give you the Class of its contents.