Re: Type wrapping blockers
Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote: > On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 05:24:18 -0700, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > >> On Wednesday 06 October 2010 04:26:43 Steven Schveighoffer wrote: >>> BTW, bug 5000 coming up! Big milestone :) >> >> Though I'm not sure that 5000 bugs is exactly something to celebrate... >> >> - Jonathan M Davis > > > That depends on how many are using D, and to which degree they are > putting DMD+Phobos through its paces. I have a project on dsource that > has zero bug reports, but I don't think it's because it's bug-free. ;) > > -Lars I agree. I always welcome the increase of list of bugs at work, my co-workers sometimes find that strange. But I figure they are in the codebase anyway, better to get them in plain sight.
Re: Type wrapping blockers
On 10/6/10 17:53 CDT, Juanjo Alvarez wrote: On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 10:21:58 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: also positive (see http://tinyurl.com/2ewh8eq). 404 Not Found. Should I open a bug report? ;) Hm, it works for me but it asks me to log in first. Probably you need an account. Andrei
Re: Type wrapping blockers
On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 10:21:58 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: also positive (see http://tinyurl.com/2ewh8eq). 404 Not Found. Should I open a bug report? ;)
Re: Type wrapping blockers
On 10/6/10 7:24 CDT, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On Wednesday 06 October 2010 04:26:43 Steven Schveighoffer wrote: BTW, bug 5000 coming up! Big milestone :) Though I'm not sure that 5000 bugs is exactly something to celebrate... Sorry, I just snatched #5000... There are 1516 open issues at the time being, and the derivative is still positive. But there are 2086 closed bugs, and the derivative is also positive (see http://tinyurl.com/2ewh8eq). There is some celebration to be had. If there were no bugs activity then the product wouldn't be used. Andrei
Re: Type wrapping blockers
On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 05:24:18 -0700, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > On Wednesday 06 October 2010 04:26:43 Steven Schveighoffer wrote: >> BTW, bug 5000 coming up! Big milestone :) > > Though I'm not sure that 5000 bugs is exactly something to celebrate... > > - Jonathan M Davis That depends on how many are using D, and to which degree they are putting DMD+Phobos through its paces. I have a project on dsource that has zero bug reports, but I don't think it's because it's bug-free. ;) -Lars
Re: Type wrapping blockers
On Wednesday 06 October 2010 04:26:43 Steven Schveighoffer wrote: > BTW, bug 5000 coming up! Big milestone :) Though I'm not sure that 5000 bugs is exactly something to celebrate... - Jonathan M Davis
Re: Type wrapping blockers
On Tue, 05 Oct 2010 08:50:04 -0400, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
One of the best methods to wrap a type is to use opDispatch. But there
are some problems that block this. It might be good to get a bug report
that gathers these together. I have one that I just ran into -- IFTI
and literals. Basically, if you have a function:
void foo(short x);
you can call foo(1) no problem.
But if you *wrap* the type that contains foo, you cannot use opDispatch
to implement foo(1), because IFTI treats 1 as an int. So what you get
is an instantiation of opDispatch like this:
opDispatch!("foo", int)(1) Which then cannot call foo, because you
cannot cast int to short.
Does anyone have any ideas on how to fix the above issue?
I found a solution: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4998
Anyone see any holes in it?
BTW, bug 5000 coming up! Big milestone :)
-Steve
Re: Type wrapping blockers
On Tue, 05 Oct 2010 08:50:04 -0400, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
One of the good goals of D I think is to be able to automatically
encapsulate a type, and all its attributes/functions, in order to
slightly alter the functionality. I think this is probably a pattern,
but I don't know what it is (Interceptor?).
One of the best methods to wrap a type is to use opDispatch. But there
are some problems that block this. It might be good to get a bug report
that gathers these together. I have one that I just ran into -- IFTI
and literals. Basically, if you have a function:
void foo(short x);
you can call foo(1) no problem.
But if you *wrap* the type that contains foo, you cannot use opDispatch
to implement foo(1), because IFTI treats 1 as an int. So what you get
is an instantiation of opDispatch like this:
opDispatch!("foo", int)(1) Which then cannot call foo, because you
cannot cast int to short.
Does anyone have any other blockers that prevent type wrapping? Does
anyone have any ideas on how to fix the above issue?
Found another one, really old bug: 1748
Basically, if you have
class C(T)
{
}
and you try to get (C!int).stringof you get just "C". This makes
specifying wrapped arguments that are class templates impossible for
mixins.
I'm giving up my workaround to try and implement the "Nifty chaining", it
appears it's just not possible with the compiler bugs today :(
-Steve
Re: Type wrapping blockers
On Tue, 05 Oct 2010 16:50:04 +0400, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
One of the good goals of D I think is to be able to automatically
encapsulate a type, and all its attributes/functions, in order to
slightly alter the functionality. I think this is probably a pattern,
but I don't know what it is (Interceptor?).
One of the best methods to wrap a type is to use opDispatch. But there
are some problems that block this. It might be good to get a bug report
that gathers these together. I have one that I just ran into -- IFTI
and literals. Basically, if you have a function:
void foo(short x);
you can call foo(1) no problem.
But if you *wrap* the type that contains foo, you cannot use opDispatch
to implement foo(1), because IFTI treats 1 as an int. So what you get
is an instantiation of opDispatch like this:
opDispatch!("foo", int)(1) Which then cannot call foo, because you
cannot cast int to short.
Does anyone have any other blockers that prevent type wrapping? Does
anyone have any ideas on how to fix the above issue?
-Steve
You can try iterating over all class methods and construct proxy ones
using string mixins at compile time. Might be next to impossible to
implement properly though :)
Re: Type wrapping blockers
On 10/5/10 9:15 CDT, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 05 Oct 2010 10:06:58 -0400, Mafi wrote:
Am 05.10.2010 14:50, schrieb Steven Schveighoffer:
One of the good goals of D I think is to be able to automatically
encapsulate a type, and all its attributes/functions, in order to
slightly alter the functionality. I think this is probably a pattern,
but I don't know what it is (Interceptor?).
One of the best methods to wrap a type is to use opDispatch. But there
are some problems that block this. It might be good to get a bug report
that gathers these together. I have one that I just ran into -- IFTI and
literals. Basically, if you have a function:
void foo(short x);
you can call foo(1) no problem.
But if you *wrap* the type that contains foo, you cannot use opDispatch
to implement foo(1), because IFTI treats 1 as an int. So what you get is
an instantiation of opDispatch like this:
opDispatch!("foo", int)(1) Which then cannot call foo, because you
cannot cast int to short.
Does anyone have any other blockers that prevent type wrapping? Does
anyone have any ideas on how to fix the above issue?
-Steve
Iff you are only wrapping one other thing (ie struct, class...), you
should be able to use alias this. It should in my opinion correctly
resolve to foo(short). If dmd doesn't find foo in your wrapper it
should look for foo in the alias before saying that 1 has to be int.
But I didn't test.
Alias this does not allow interception of calls.
I want to do something inside opDispatch besides just calling foo(1).
-Steve
If you only want to intercept a few specific calls, you may want to use
alias this and simply define the appropriate methods. They will be found
by name lookup before alias this kicks in.
For intercepting all calls even to method names you don't know, indeed
opDispatch is the way to go.
Andrei
Re: Type wrapping blockers
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
But if you *wrap* the type that contains foo, you cannot use opDispatch
to implement foo(1), because IFTI treats 1 as an int. So what you get
is an instantiation of opDispatch like this:
opDispatch!("foo", int)(1) Which then cannot call foo, because you
cannot cast int to short.
Does anyone have any other blockers that prevent type wrapping? Does
anyone have any ideas on how to fix the above issue?
Not directly. However, you could probably coerce std.typecons'
AutoImplement to do your wrapping for you.
--
Simen
Re: Type wrapping blockers
On Tue, 05 Oct 2010 10:25:31 -0400, Don wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
One of the good goals of D I think is to be able to automatically
encapsulate a type, and all its attributes/functions, in order to
slightly alter the functionality. I think this is probably a pattern,
but I don't know what it is (Interceptor?).
One of the best methods to wrap a type is to use opDispatch. But
there are some problems that block this. It might be good to get a bug
report that gathers these together. I have one that I just ran into --
IFTI and literals. Basically, if you have a function:
void foo(short x);
you can call foo(1) no problem.
But if you *wrap* the type that contains foo, you cannot use
opDispatch to implement foo(1), because IFTI treats 1 as an int. So
what you get is an instantiation of opDispatch like this:
opDispatch!("foo", int)(1) Which then cannot call foo, because you
cannot cast int to short.
That is bug 4953.
I don't think so, because I'm using IFTI to imply the argument types. A
generic opDispatch to wrap a function:
auto opDispatch(string op, Args...)(Args args)
{
/* perform interception work here */
return mixin!("wrappedVal." ~ op ~ "(args)");
}
If you don't know what the arguments are *supposed* to be, I'm unsure how
to derive them based on what the type being wrapped supports.
The specific situation that's failing, in dcollections, I have a function:
add(V[] elems...)
where V is the type being collected. When V == short, then calling add
directly like this:
add(1,2,3,4,5);
works fine. But calling the wrapper with add(1,2,3,4,5) fails, because
Args... is interpreted as int, int, int, int, int.
What I really need is to say "hey IFTI, determine the argument types by
looking up as if it were called on this type, because that's what I'm
going to call" rather than use the arguments themselves.
Bug 4953 is when IFTI should play no part in determing the argument
types. Or am I missing something?
-Steve
Re: Type wrapping blockers
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
One of the good goals of D I think is to be able to automatically
encapsulate a type, and all its attributes/functions, in order to
slightly alter the functionality. I think this is probably a pattern,
but I don't know what it is (Interceptor?).
One of the best methods to wrap a type is to use opDispatch. But there
are some problems that block this. It might be good to get a bug report
that gathers these together. I have one that I just ran into -- IFTI
and literals. Basically, if you have a function:
void foo(short x);
you can call foo(1) no problem.
But if you *wrap* the type that contains foo, you cannot use opDispatch
to implement foo(1), because IFTI treats 1 as an int. So what you get
is an instantiation of opDispatch like this:
opDispatch!("foo", int)(1) Which then cannot call foo, because you
cannot cast int to short.
That is bug 4953.
Re: Type wrapping blockers
On Tue, 05 Oct 2010 10:06:58 -0400, Mafi wrote:
Am 05.10.2010 14:50, schrieb Steven Schveighoffer:
One of the good goals of D I think is to be able to automatically
encapsulate a type, and all its attributes/functions, in order to
slightly alter the functionality. I think this is probably a pattern,
but I don't know what it is (Interceptor?).
One of the best methods to wrap a type is to use opDispatch. But there
are some problems that block this. It might be good to get a bug report
that gathers these together. I have one that I just ran into -- IFTI and
literals. Basically, if you have a function:
void foo(short x);
you can call foo(1) no problem.
But if you *wrap* the type that contains foo, you cannot use opDispatch
to implement foo(1), because IFTI treats 1 as an int. So what you get is
an instantiation of opDispatch like this:
opDispatch!("foo", int)(1) Which then cannot call foo, because you
cannot cast int to short.
Does anyone have any other blockers that prevent type wrapping? Does
anyone have any ideas on how to fix the above issue?
-Steve
Iff you are only wrapping one other thing (ie struct, class...), you
should be able to use alias this. It should in my opinion correctly
resolve to foo(short). If dmd doesn't find foo in your wrapper it should
look for foo in the alias before saying that 1 has to be int.
But I didn't test.
Alias this does not allow interception of calls.
I want to do something inside opDispatch besides just calling foo(1).
-Steve
Re: Type wrapping blockers
Am 05.10.2010 14:50, schrieb Steven Schveighoffer:
One of the good goals of D I think is to be able to automatically
encapsulate a type, and all its attributes/functions, in order to
slightly alter the functionality. I think this is probably a pattern,
but I don't know what it is (Interceptor?).
One of the best methods to wrap a type is to use opDispatch. But there
are some problems that block this. It might be good to get a bug report
that gathers these together. I have one that I just ran into -- IFTI and
literals. Basically, if you have a function:
void foo(short x);
you can call foo(1) no problem.
But if you *wrap* the type that contains foo, you cannot use opDispatch
to implement foo(1), because IFTI treats 1 as an int. So what you get is
an instantiation of opDispatch like this:
opDispatch!("foo", int)(1) Which then cannot call foo, because you
cannot cast int to short.
Does anyone have any other blockers that prevent type wrapping? Does
anyone have any ideas on how to fix the above issue?
-Steve
Iff you are only wrapping one other thing (ie struct, class...), you
should be able to use alias this. It should in my opinion correctly
resolve to foo(short). If dmd doesn't find foo in your wrapper it should
look for foo in the alias before saying that 1 has to be int.
But I didn't test.
Mafi
Type wrapping blockers
One of the good goals of D I think is to be able to automatically
encapsulate a type, and all its attributes/functions, in order to slightly
alter the functionality. I think this is probably a pattern, but I don't
know what it is (Interceptor?).
One of the best methods to wrap a type is to use opDispatch. But there
are some problems that block this. It might be good to get a bug report
that gathers these together. I have one that I just ran into -- IFTI and
literals. Basically, if you have a function:
void foo(short x);
you can call foo(1) no problem.
But if you *wrap* the type that contains foo, you cannot use opDispatch to
implement foo(1), because IFTI treats 1 as an int. So what you get is an
instantiation of opDispatch like this:
opDispatch!("foo", int)(1) Which then cannot call foo, because you cannot
cast int to short.
Does anyone have any other blockers that prevent type wrapping? Does
anyone have any ideas on how to fix the above issue?
-Steve
