Issue #17145 has been updated by marcandre (Marc-Andre Lafortune).


ko1 (Koichi Sasada) wrote in #note-4:
> One concern about the name "freeze" is, what happens on shareable objects on Ractors.
> For example, Ractor objects are shareable and they don't need to freeze to send beyond Ractor boundary.
> 
> I also want to introduce Mutable but shareable objects using STM (or something similar) writing protocol (shareable Hash). What happens on `deep_freeze`?

I think these objects should stop the propagation. The name `make_shareable_via_ractor_by_deep_freezing_what_is_necessary` would be more accurate but too long 



----------------------------------------
Feature #17145: Ractor-aware `Object#deep_freeze`
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/17145#change-87425

* Author: marcandre (Marc-Andre Lafortune)
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
----------------------------------------
I'd like to propose `Object#deep_freeze`:

Freezes recursively the contents of the receiver (by calling `deep_freeze`) and
then the receiver itself (by calling `freeze`).
Values that are shareable via `Ractor` (e.g. classes) are never frozen this way.

```ruby
# freezes recursively:
ast = [:hash, [:pair, [:str, 'hello'], [:sym, :world]]].deep_freeze
ast.dig(1, 1) # => [:str, 'hello']
ast.dig(1, 1).compact! # => FrozenError

# does not freeze classes:
[[String]].deep_freeze
String.frozen? # => false

# calls `freeze`:
class Foo
  def freeze
    build_cache!
    puts "Ready for freeze"
    super
  end
  # ...
end
[[[Foo.new]]].deep_freeze # => Outputs "Ready for freeze"
```


I think a variant `deep_freeze!` that raises an exception if the result isn't Ractor-shareable would be useful too:

```ruby
class Fire
  def freeze
    # do not call super
  end
end

x = [Fire.new]
x.deep_freeze! # => "Could not be deeply-frozen: #<Fire:0x00007ff151994748>"
```



-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request / ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>