Skip to content

[generator] Encapsulate and parallelize enum generation. #442

New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 17, 2019

Conversation

jpobst
Copy link
Contributor

@jpobst jpobst commented Jul 1, 2019

Encapsulate the generation of the enum files to EnumGenerator. This helps make it testable and easier to ensure it is thread-safe. With it being thread-safe we can now generate these files in parallel. On my 6 core machine, this reduces the time taken from ~5.5s to ~1.1s.

@jpobst jpobst requested a review from jonpryor July 1, 2019 19:36
return cls.FullName + "." + fld.Name;
});

return files.ToList ();
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I believe that this should be files.OrderBy (f => f).ToList (), or some variation thereof.

Rationale: C# deterministic builds. If, for whatever reason, generator is re-executed during a build, it would be nice if, when deterministic builds are enabled, the resulting assembly did not change unless the generated code actually changed.

The order of generated files appears to be used in the csc /deterministic algorithm, and thus altering the order of files may result in the creation of a different assembly. For example:

// app1.cs
class App1 {
	public static void Main ()
	{
		App2 a = new App2 ();
	}
}
// app2.cs
class App2 {
}
$ csc /deterministic /out:upwards.exe app1.cs app2.cs
$ csc /deterministic /out:downwards.exe app2.cs app1.cs
$ md5 downwards.exe upwards.exe 
MD5 (downwards.exe) = cb7690e4878515303bde517447130b28
MD5 (upwards.exe) = b258bd49fe38709db5191f1adef9afc9

"Simply" changing the order of command-line arguments results in a different assembly.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah, I missed that. Thanks!

KeyValuePair<string, EnumMappings.EnumDescription> CreateEnum ()
{
var enu = new EnumMappings.EnumDescription {
Members = new Dictionary<string, string> {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Entirely unrelated, this Members and JniNames APIs are ugly; they need to be consistent with each other, but they're entirely separate properties, and thus need not actually be consistent. :-(

(This doesn't need to be fixed here; it's simply that I noticed this now.)

@jonpryor jonpryor merged commit e6de6f0 into master Jul 17, 2019
@jpobst jpobst deleted the parallel-enums branch July 18, 2019 14:33
@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Apr 13, 2024
# for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? #.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants