digitalmars.D - Can getHash be made pure?
- "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> Mar 09 2012
- Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> Mar 09 2012
- Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> Mar 09 2012
- Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> Mar 09 2012
- Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> Mar 10 2012
- =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Alex_R=F8nne_Petersen?= <xtzgzorex gmail.com> Mar 10 2012
- Dmitry Olshansky <dmitry.olsh gmail.com> Mar 11 2012
Still chugging away at implementing AA's in druntime proper, I reviewed the code for methods that can be marked pure but ran into a major road block: getHash() is not marked pure. That makes a lot of AA methods impure, that could, and probably should, be marked pure. Is it possible to make TypeInfo.getHash() pure? AFAICT there's no good reason why it shouldn't be pure. Am I missing something? T -- The most powerful one-line C program: #include "/dev/tty" -- IOCCC
Mar 09 2012
On 3/9/2012 1:54 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:Still chugging away at implementing AA's in druntime proper, I reviewed the code for methods that can be marked pure but ran into a major road block: getHash() is not marked pure. That makes a lot of AA methods impure, that could, and probably should, be marked pure. Is it possible to make TypeInfo.getHash() pure? AFAICT there's no good reason why it shouldn't be pure. Am I missing something?
It should be const, pure, nothrow, safe.
Mar 09 2012
On 3/9/2012 5:15 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:I tried to make getHash() const pure nothrow safe, but found that in some places it calls toHash() which isn't marked const pure nothrow safe. So I fixed that as well, then found that toHash() calls toString() which isn't pure, nothrow, nor safe... and before I knew it, I was deep into marking a *lot* of druntime functions (as perhaps they *should* be), and then I ran into this: src/object_.d(648): Error: function object.TypeInfo_AssociativeArray.next () is not callable using argument types () src/object_.d(648): Error: function object.TypeInfo_AssociativeArray.next () is not callable using argument types () src/object_.d(759): Error: function object.TypeInfo_Class.info () is not callable using argument types () src/object_.d(1334): Error: cannot uniquely infer foreach argument types src/core/runtime.d(483): Error: cannot uniquely infer foreach argument types make: *** [lib/libdruntime-linux32.a] Error 1
Yeah, I know, it's viral. Can't do it piecemeal.A related question though: have we implemented automatic propagation of attributes like pure/nothrow/etc., yet? Just wondering if I can just modify the base class and have the attributes propagate, or I have to search for every override of every affected function in order to mark them (as I have been doing -- just wanted to make sure it isn't for nothing).
For 2.059, yes.
Mar 09 2012
On 3/9/2012 7:21 PM, Martin Nowak wrote:Bottom-up instead of top-down?
both.
Mar 09 2012
On 2012-03-10 04:21, Martin Nowak wrote:On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 03:18:59 +0100, Walter BrightYeah, I know, it's viral. Can't do it piecemeal.
Hard to find somewhere to start? -- /Jacob Carlborg
Mar 10 2012
On 10-03-2012 18:48, H. S. Teoh wrote:On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 06:21:08PM +0100, Jacob Carlborg wrote:On 2012-03-10 04:21, Martin Nowak wrote:On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 03:18:59 +0100, Walter BrightYeah, I know, it's viral. Can't do it piecemeal.
Hard to find somewhere to start?
Not that hard. Just search for toString in Object, and add qualifiers to it, then compile. You'll find a ton of errors caused by propagated qualifiers. Fix those, and you'll find more, ad nauseaum. After a few iterations of this, I found myself labelling almost every method in Object, TypeInfo, and a whole bunch of other places. I'll need to sit down someday to properly and thoroughly do this. Currently my git branch is uncompilable due to a couple o' nasty places, and I'm ready to throw in the towel. :-( Maybe I'll just finish up the actual AA implementation first, then come back to revisit pure/nothrow/const/ safe after the code itself is actually working. T
That sounds like the best possible strategy. -- - Alex
Mar 10 2012
On 10.03.2012 21:48, H. S. Teoh wrote:On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 06:21:08PM +0100, Jacob Carlborg wrote:On 2012-03-10 04:21, Martin Nowak wrote:On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 03:18:59 +0100, Walter BrightYeah, I know, it's viral. Can't do it piecemeal.
Hard to find somewhere to start?
Not that hard. Just search for toString in Object, and add qualifiers to it, then compile. You'll find a ton of errors caused by propagated qualifiers. Fix those, and you'll find more, ad nauseaum. After a few iterations of this, I found myself labelling almost every method in Object, TypeInfo, and a whole bunch of other places. I'll need to sit down someday to properly and thoroughly do this. Currently my git branch is uncompilable due to a couple o' nasty places, and I'm ready to throw in the towel. :-( Maybe I'll just finish up the actual AA implementation first, then come back to revisit pure/nothrow/const/ safe after the code itself is actually working. T
At least safe 'leak' could be temporarily plugged with trusted. -- Dmitry Olshansky
Mar 11 2012









Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> 