Method code too large!

[ikitommi]

Hi. I was testing different routing libs and noticed that ataraxy fails on large routing trees:

(require '[ataraxy.core :as ataraxy])

(def aroutes
  (ataraxy/compile
    (->> (range 100)
         (map (partial str "command"))
         (mapv (fn [command] [(str "/api/" command) [(keyword command)]]))
         (into {}))))

(ataraxy/matches aroutes {:uri "/api/command55"})
; [:command55]

(ataraxy/compile
  (->> (range 200)
       (map (partial str "command"))
       (mapv (fn [command] [(str "/api/" command) [(keyword command)]]))
       (into {})))
; CompilerException java.lang.RuntimeException: Method code too large!

tested with 0.4.0.

[weavejester]

Thanks for the report. It looks like I'll need to consider ways of reducing the code generated, or splitting the route up into multiple methods.

[jimpil]

I think the problem stems from how compile-match-route is (recursively) expanded, producing more and more expressions (via the compile-match-result, compile-match-destruct etc etc calls). All of these nested expressions end up being part of the same function (the one returned by compile-match).

Without having tried it, I believe the whole thing can be avoided by returning no-arg fns, as opposed to expressions, from all the following, and doing a linear search via some-fn (or something along these lines). I doubt it would hurt performance...

• compile-match-result
• compile-match-destruct
• compile-match-params
• compile-match-method
• compile-match-path

This way the recursive macro expansion would produce more and more fn invocations, rather than more and more raw code.

I can have a crack at this maybe this weekend or the next, if you're interested.

[jimpil]

Ok, I just had a quick stab at this and it's not as straight-forward as I thought. :(