www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.bugs - [Issue 1348] New: offTi property of TypeInfo return empty array.

reply d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1348

           Summary: offTi property of TypeInfo return empty array.
           Product: D
           Version: 1.018
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: DMD
        AssignedTo: bugzilla digitalmars.com
        ReportedBy: aaroncraelius gmail.com


The OffsetTypeInfo array returned by the offTi property of TypeInfo seems to be
empty for classes that I have tried to examine.  I have tested this with Tango
and DMD 1.018 and 1.015 and with Phobos and DMD 2.002.


-- 
Jul 18 2007
next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1348


gamerChad gmail.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Version|1.018                       |1.020




------- Comment #1 from gamerChad gmail.com  2007-08-14 09:46 -------
I am testing with dmd+phobos on Windows.

I found that this bug is present on dmd 1.004, 1.010, and 1.020.
I also found that the offTi property does not seem to exist in dmd 1.003.  The
OffsetTypeInfo type is also not present in that version.  


-- 
Aug 14 2007
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1348


deewiant gmail.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Version|1.020                       |1.004




------- Comment #2 from deewiant gmail.com  2007-08-31 06:34 -------
Please set the version number to the oldest, not the newest, applicable.
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/bugs/bugzilla_usage_tips_10071.html


-- 
Aug 31 2007
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1348


Rob Jacques <sandford jhu.edu> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |sandford jhu.edu


--- Comment #3 from Rob Jacques <sandford jhu.edu> 2010-02-20 21:03:11 PST ---
This appears to never have been implemented:
From toobj.c in the DMD 2.040 source tree, at both 462-464 and 909-911: 

    // offTi[]
    dtdword(&dt, 0);
    dtdword(&dt, 0);        // null for now, fix later

I ran into this in attempting to do runtime reflection for serialization, etc.
without forcing the use if template mixins, etc.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Feb 20 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1348


Rob Jacques <sandford jhu.edu> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|wrong-code                  |


--- Comment #4 from Rob Jacques <sandford jhu.edu> 2010-12-27 09:27:09 PST ---
Gide, wrong-code bugs are bugs where the assembly generated by DMD is
incorrect. Not generating the offset type info isn't a wrong-code bug.
Generating a bad offset typeinfo array would be.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Dec 27 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1348


Gide Nwawudu <gide nwawudu.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |gide nwawudu.com


--- Comment #5 from Gide Nwawudu <gide nwawudu.com> 2010-12-27 10:56:02 PST ---
I thought anything the compiles and does not work as defined by the spec is
wrong-code, this would include outputting zeros instead of an offset.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Dec 27 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1348


nfxjfg gmail.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |nfxjfg gmail.com


--- Comment #6 from nfxjfg gmail.com 2010-12-27 13:08:04 PST ---
(In reply to comment #3)
 I ran into this in attempting to do runtime reflection for serialization, etc.
 without forcing the use if template mixins, etc.

You better start using a real programming language then, such as Scala, Vala or Go. Walter most likely disabled generation of this because it took too much space. The direction D2 is going is towards compile time reflection, and cutting down runtime reflection. (Even though compile time reflection will lead to much worse code bloat in the end, but the D designers don't know how to make sense.) This bug should probably be closed as INVALID, but leaving it open is a good way to put a little stress in Walter & Co. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Dec 27 2010
prev sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1348


Rob Jacques <sandford jhu.edu> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |spec


--- Comment #7 from Rob Jacques <sandford jhu.edu> 2010-12-27 13:46:23 PST ---
nfxjfg, as noted in this bug report, this isn't a regression: D has never had
any form of runtime-reflection so Walter can't have disabled it, etc. To the
best of my knowledge, the shape of D's runtime reflection is still pending. 

Gide, you're technically right, but I feel there's a big difference in severity
between, not implemented yet and silently generating incorrect code. I have
added the spec keyword, because it's probably a good idea to remove the Offset
type info placeholders until D's runtime-reflection strategy is defined.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Dec 27 2010