Caller.TryCallFunction#233
Closed
martindevans wants to merge 1 commit into
Closed
Conversation
… be called without allocating a `Function` object.
Merged
Contributor
Author
|
Superseded by #235 |
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Added
TryCallFunctionmethods toCaller. This allows functions to be called without allocating aFunctionobject. An alternative solution would be to convertFunctioninto a struct, but this is a much larger change!The main shortcoming with this is that
ValueBoxcannot be stack allocated. So this API is really just passing the buck on allocating anything - the caller can avoid allocations (rent an array) but it's not very ergonomic. See the unit tests for example.Another implementation could have generic arguments for all possible call/return combinations (and then use
ValueBox.Converter<T>().Box(value)). This would be a fairly nice API to use, but would require generating yet more huge blobs of code.I'm open to other suggestions on a better way to pass arguments and results.