Re^2: Sharing XS object?

[menth0l]

in reply to Re: Sharing XS object?
in thread Sharing XS object?

I don't know if i understand this correctly:

# this produces error: "invalid value for shared scalar"
my $o :shared = new Tree::BK_XS;

# and this causes perl to crash
my $o :shared = shared_clone(new Tree::BK_XS);

I always thought that that link that you've posted refers to hash-based, pure-perl objects?

[BrowserUk]

# this produces error: "invalid value for shared scalar"
my $o :shared = new Tree::BK_XS;

Which versions of perl/threads/threads::shared are you using?

Show us the new() method of your module.

[menth0l]

Versions:
Perl: ActiveState 5.10
Threads: 1.82
Threads-shared: 1.36
My new() function from BK_XS.xs file:

#include "EXTERN.h"
#include "perl.h"
#include "XSUB.h"
#include "ppport.h"
#include "BKTree.h"

MODULE = Tree::BK_XS    PACKAGE = Tree::BK_XS    PREFIX= BK_

SV *
BK_new(package)
        char * package

    PROTOTYPE: $

    CODE:
    OBJECT t;
    SV *tp;
    t = new_object();
    tp = newSVpv((char *)&t, sizeof(OBJECT));
        RETVAL = newRV(tp);
    SvREFCNT_dec(tp);
        sv_bless(RETVAL, gv_stashpv(package, 0));
    SvREADONLY_on(tp);

    OUTPUT:
        RETVAL

[BrowserUk]

If this is possible--I've never done it, mostly because I've never seen a need for it--then success will resolve around using the bless() function exported from threads::shared rather than the built-in version.

Whilst it is possible to gain access to threads::shared::bless() from within your XS code, the simplest method to test whether it will actually work for you, would be to export the RV (RETVAL) from your XS new() (perhaps renamed _new()) un-blessed; and then add a wrapper method in the .pm file that calls the XS _new() and then applies the modified bless() (imported from threads::shared) at the Perl level before returning it.

That should get you past the "Invalid value for shared scalar" problem. I do not expect it to be a complete solution. You will almost certainly have to add a CLONE() method to the package. And you will need to deal with the problem of multiple DESTROY()s. But one step at a time.

If you module isn't proprietary, and doesn't have a raft of dependancies, and you were prepared to let me have an installable copy, it might make solving the knock on problems quicker.