Implement handle scope API in jerry-ext #2753
Conversation
legendecas
force-pushed
the
handle-scope
branch
3 times, most recently
from
f0a2834 to
ce1871f
Compare
legendecas
force-pushed
the
handle-scope
branch
3 times, most recently
from
791b655 to
22bc118
Compare
LaszloLango
added
development
legendecas
force-pushed
the
handle-scope
branch
from
22bc118 to
6402dbe
Compare
|
|
||
| #define JERRYX_HANDLE_SCOPE_FIELDS \ | ||
| jerry_value_t handle_prelist[JERRYX_HANDLE_PRELIST_SIZE]; \ | ||
| size_t handle_count; \ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Am I understand correctly that handle_count must be lass than JERRYX_HANDLE_PRELIST_SIZE? If so, uint8_t should be enough.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, handle_count could grows greater than JERRYX_HANDLE_PRELIST_SIZE, after then new handles would be allocated outside of prelist as a chained list instead.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you need to count those handles in the chained list? It seems to me there is no api function to get the number of handles, and the rest of the functions could be changed to handle_count to not grow after reaching JERRYX_HANDLE_PRELIST_SIZE. Is there a function where it would be a large performance drawback to do this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Updated :). Only handles in prelist would be counted then.
|
|
||
| typedef struct jerryx_handle_scope_s jerryx_handle_scope_t; | ||
| typedef jerryx_handle_scope_t *jerryx_handle_scope; | ||
| typedef jerryx_handle_scope_t *jerryx_escapable_handle_scope; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does it worth to have two structures for this? Can we gain much on having a "non-escapable" handle scope?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Currently there is no differences between those two types. It's just declared as two different type for possible future data struct migration issue.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we gain much on having a "non-escapable" handle scope?
A bool field escaped could be saved in the case.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yet since there is a list of pre-allocated handle scopes, these handle scopes in the list must be escapable for possible usage.
legendecas
force-pushed
the
handle-scope
branch
from
6402dbe to
dde2fda
Compare
|
Just forgot to push a naming issue here. Updated 😅 |
legendecas
force-pushed
the
handle-scope
branch
from
dde2fda to
c51245e
Compare
|
Any update on this PR? |
JerryScript-DCO-1.0-Signed-off-by: legendecas legendecas@gmail.com
legendecas
force-pushed
the
handle-scope
branch
from
c51245e to
56a8069
Compare
close #2732.
Picked from https://github.com/yodaos-project/ShadowNode/tree/master/deps/jerry/jerry-ext/handle-scope
JerryScript-DCO-1.0-Signed-off-by: legendecas legendecas@gmail.com