refactor(transformer/class-properties): re-order fields and expand comments #10447
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Member
Author
How to use the Graphite Merge QueueAdd either label to this PR to merge it via the merge queue:
You must have a Graphite account in order to use the merge queue. Sign up using this link. An organization admin has enabled the Graphite Merge Queue in this repository. Please do not merge from GitHub as this will restart CI on PRs being processed by the merge queue. This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking. |
github-actions
bot
added
A-transformer
CodSpeed Instrumentation Performance ReportMerging #10447 will create unknown performance changesComparing Summary
Benchmarks breakdown
|
Dunqing
approved these changes
Apr 16, 2025
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good!
By the way, I forgot one thing in my PR: to add a debug_assert_eq!(self.private_field_count, 0) in exit_program or elsewhere to ensure we are correctly handling private_field_count so that we can catch any potential bug related to this in the future if we do a huge refactor in class_properties.
Member
Author
Merge activity
|
…mments (#10447) Follow-on after #10418. Pure refactor. `private_field_count` is accessed in both the entry and exit phases of the transform, so move that field up to be with the other fields which are in that same category. Expand the comment which explains how this optimization works. Also, when reviewing #10418, I had to trace through the logic to make sure that it wasn't possible for decreasing `private_field_count` on exit to get skipped if `is_transform_required` is `false`. Turns out it's not a problem - `is_transform_required` is always `true` if class has any private properties/methods. Add comments to clarify that.
graphite-app
bot
force-pushed
the
04-16-refactor_transformer_class-properties_re-order_fields_and_expand_comments
branch
from
ae08f67 to
3ebd494
Compare
graphite-app
bot
deleted the
04-16-refactor_transformer_class-properties_re-order_fields_and_expand_comments
branch
graphite-app bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 17, 2025
…ount` is 0 at end of transform (#10457) `private_field_count` is incremented when entering a class with private properties/methods and decremented when leaving it. Make sure this is working correctly by ensuring `private_field_count == 0` at the end of the transform. As suggested in #10447 (review).
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Follow-on after #10418. Pure refactor.
private_field_countis accessed in both the entry and exit phases of the transform, so move that field up to be with the other fields which are in that same category.Expand the comment which explains how this optimization works.
Also, when reviewing #10418, I had to trace through the logic to make sure that it wasn't possible for decreasing
private_field_counton exit to get skipped ifis_transform_requiredisfalse. Turns out it's not a problem -is_transform_requiredis alwaystrueif class has any private properties/methods. Add comments to clarify that.