-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.5k
refactor: replace OnceLock
with LazyLock
#13641
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
// TODO: Use LazyLock instead of getter function when MSRV gets bumped | ||
static $name: OnceLock<LogicalTypeRef> = OnceLock::new(); | ||
static $name: LazyLock<LogicalTypeRef> = | ||
LazyLock::new(|| Arc::new(NativeType::$ty)); | ||
|
||
#[doc = "Getter for singleton instance of a logical type representing"] | ||
#[doc = concat!("[`NativeType::", stringify!($ty), "`].")] | ||
pub fn $getter() -> LogicalTypeRef { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Current callers require a LogicalTypeRef
, so this getter still seems to be needed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks @jonahgao
THere appear to be quite a few more uses of OnceLock in th code too:
https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Aapache%2Fdatafusion+OnceLock&type=code
Do you plan on moving them too?
I also linked this PR to #11687 which has a few other PRs linked as well that were in draft
Thats good point, wondering we probably want to use LazyLock in documentation generation |
* refactor: Replace OnceLock with LazyLock * Fix typo
Which issue does this PR close?
Part of #11687
Clear the TODOs after updating MSRV to 1.80.
Rationale for this change
LazyLock
has been stable since Rust version 1.80.0, and it provides a simpler and more suitable way to define static variables.What changes are included in this PR?
Are these changes tested?
Yes. By existing tests.
Are there any user-facing changes?
No