• dsimcha (6/6) Aug 15 2011 I'm getting annoying runtime errors about "Cycle detected between module...
• Steven Schveighoffer (8/19) Aug 15 2011 From what I understand of how the compiler works, such ctor/dtors are p...
• dsimcha (2/5) Aug 15 2011 Haven't reduced it yet, am hoping not to have to.
• Steven Schveighoffer (5/10) Aug 16 2011 Can you at least give the modules that are supposedly included in the
• dsimcha (7/18) Aug 16 2011 They're modules in a decent sized program, not publicly available code.

dsimcha <dsimcha yahoo.com> writes:

I'm getting annoying runtime errors about "Cycle detected between modules with
ctors/dtors" in a large program that doesn't have any module c'tors/d'tors, at
least not explicitly.  (i.e. there's no static this or static ~this in the
whole project, not counting the libs it imports).  Is there any way a module
c'tor/d'tor could be hidden, such that there is one even if there's no actual
static this statement?

"Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com> writes:

On Mon, 15 Aug 2011 17:04:07 -0400, dsimcha <dsimcha yahoo.com> wrote:

 I'm getting annoying runtime errors about "Cycle detected between  
 modules with
 ctors/dtors" in a large program that doesn't have any module  
 c'tors/d'tors, at
 least not explicitly.  (i.e. there's no static this or static ~this in  
 the
 whole project, not counting the libs it imports).  Is there any way a  
 module
 c'tor/d'tor could be hidden, such that there is one even if there's no  
 actual
 static this statement?

 From what I understand of how the compiler works, such ctor/dtors are put  
into compiler-generated modules marked as "standalone", meaning they  
should be ignored in terms of cycle detection (even though they *do* have  
ctor/dtors).

Do you have an example? It may be a bug in the compiler/cycle detection  
algorithm.

-Steve

dsimcha <dsimcha yahoo.com> writes:

== Quote from Steven Schveighoffer (schveiguy yahoo.com)'s article
 Do you have an example? It may be a bug in the compiler/cycle detection
 algorithm.
 -Steve

Haven't reduced it yet, am hoping not to have to.

"Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com> writes:

On Mon, 15 Aug 2011 17:46:52 -0400, dsimcha <dsimcha yahoo.com> wrote:

 == Quote from Steven Schveighoffer (schveiguy yahoo.com)'s article
 Do you have an example? It may be a bug in the compiler/cycle detection
 algorithm.
 -Steve

 Haven't reduced it yet, am hoping not to have to.

Can you at least give the modules that are supposedly included in the  
cycle, but shouldn't have any ctor/dtors?  The new cycle detection code  
should print a detailed description of where the cycle is.

-Steve

dsimcha <dsimcha yahoo.com> writes:

On 8/16/2011 7:19 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
 On Mon, 15 Aug 2011 17:46:52 -0400, dsimcha <dsimcha yahoo.com> wrote:

 == Quote from Steven Schveighoffer (schveiguy yahoo.com)'s article
 Do you have an example? It may be a bug in the compiler/cycle detection
 algorithm.
 -Steve

 Haven't reduced it yet, am hoping not to have to.

 Can you at least give the modules that are supposedly included in the
 cycle, but shouldn't have any ctor/dtors? The new cycle detection code
 should print a detailed description of where the cycle is.

 -Steve

They're modules in a decent sized program, not publicly available code. 
  I was running into some extremely weird errors besides this on the 
machine I was working on.  I'm thinking that my entire build process 
might have somehow been misconfigured.  When I posted this I was hoping 
that I was missing something silly and obvious, but apparently not.  If 
I keep running into this then I will take the time to reduce it.