From: Alexander Turenko <alexander.turenko@tarantool.org>
To: Timur Safin <tsafin@tarantool.org>
Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org, v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 2.X v4 3/4] module api: introduced luaT_toibuf instead of luaL_checkibuf
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 06:50:39 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201014035039.glx2veliqncoyp5z@tkn_work_nb> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fefe53d5e5c88be9e6762783003a1213b2d67cda.1602629628.git.tsafin@tarantool.org>
> module api: introduced luaT_toibuf instead of luaL_checkibuf
We usually try to fit into 50 symbols. Okay, sometimes we overrun it a
bit (and I was one of persons who asked to don't make it hard limit),
where it is hard to give a short description, but it is not the case,
right?
BTW, imperative mood ('introduce') is suggested for a commit message
header (just header, not the entire body).
(I would name it 'module api/lua: expose luaT_toibuf()' if you want my
opinion on this essential topic.)
> * made `luaL_checkibuf` public;
> * renamed it to `luaT_toibuf` to follow naming convention
> (it's not raising error, and is casting to ibuf type).
Did you mean 'returns a pointer to' by 'is casting to'? It tooks some
time to get the idea. Hmm, but lua_check<...> also returns a pointer.
I don't push you to anything, just noted that I'm a bit confused here as
a reader.
> +static int
> +test_checkibuf(lua_State *L)
> +{
> + struct ibuf *buf;
> + buf = luaT_toibuf(L, -1);
> + lua_pushboolean(L, buf != NULL);
> + return 1;
> +}
I don't bother enough about the test to insist on it now, but it looks
just as inconsistency. Why not test_toibuf()?
> +local function test_buffers(test, module)
> + test:plan(9)
> + local ffi = require('ffi')
> + local buffer = require('buffer')
> +
> + local bufalloc = buffer.static_alloc("char", 128)
> + local ibuf = buffer.ibuf()
> + local pbuf = ibuf:alloc(128)
> +
> + test:ok(not module.checkibuf(nil), 'checkibuf of nil')
> + test:ok(not module.checkibuf({}), 'checkibuf of {}')
> + test:ok(not module.checkibuf(1LL), 'checkibuf of 1LL')
> + test:ok(not module.checkibuf(box.NULL), 'checkibuf of box.NULL')
> + test:ok(not module.checkibuf(buffer.reg1), 'checkibuf of reg1')
> + test:ok(not module.checkibuf(bufalloc), 'checkibuf of allocated buffer')
> + test:ok(module.checkibuf(buffer.IBUF_SHARED), "checkibuf of ibuf*")
> + test:ok(module.checkibuf(ibuf), 'checkibuf of ibuf')
> + test:ok(not module.checkibuf(pbuf), 'checkibuf of pointer to ibuf data')
And here too: why 'checkibuf of nil'? The subject of the test is
luaT_isibuf().
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-14 3:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-13 23:01 [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 2.X v4 0/4] module api: extend for external merger Lua module Timur Safin
2020-10-13 23:01 ` [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 2.X v4 1/4] module api: export box_tuple_validate Timur Safin
2020-10-15 21:38 ` Alexander Turenko
2020-10-15 21:47 ` Timur Safin
2020-10-15 22:03 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy
2020-10-13 23:01 ` [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 2.X v4 2/4] module api: export box_key_def_dup Timur Safin
2020-10-13 23:01 ` [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 2.X v4 3/4] module api: introduced luaT_toibuf instead of luaL_checkibuf Timur Safin
2020-10-14 3:50 ` Alexander Turenko [this message]
2020-10-15 21:07 ` Timur Safin
2020-10-15 22:04 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy
2020-10-13 23:01 ` [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 2.X v4 4/4] module api: box_ibuf_* wrappers Timur Safin
2020-10-14 3:31 ` Alexander Turenko
2020-10-15 21:35 ` Timur Safin
2020-10-15 21:42 ` Alexander Turenko
2020-10-15 21:44 ` Timur Safin
2020-10-15 21:52 ` Alexander Turenko
2020-10-15 22:07 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy
2020-10-15 22:20 ` Alexander Turenko
2020-10-15 22:27 ` Timur Safin
2020-10-15 22:47 ` Alexander Turenko
2020-10-15 22:37 ` Alexander Turenko
2020-10-15 22:48 ` Alexander Turenko
2020-10-15 22:39 ` [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 2.X v4.1] " Timur Safin
2020-10-16 6:10 ` [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 2.X v4 0/4] module api: extend for external merger Lua module Alexander Turenko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20201014035039.glx2veliqncoyp5z@tkn_work_nb \
--to=alexander.turenko@tarantool.org \
--cc=tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org \
--cc=tsafin@tarantool.org \
--cc=v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org \
--subject='Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 2.X v4 3/4] module api: introduced luaT_toibuf instead of luaL_checkibuf' \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox