digitalmars.D.bugs - [Issue 5941] New: Using inner struct which references nested function in a no-attribute or auto-return member function causes "nested function cannot be accessed" error
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (45/45) May 07 2011 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5941
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (23/23) May 07 2011 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5941
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (22/22) Dec 21 2011 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5941
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (13/13) Dec 21 2011 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5941
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (16/16) Jan 18 2012 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5941
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (34/34) Mar 04 2013 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5941
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5941
Summary: Using inner struct which references nested function in
a no-attribute or auto-return member function causes
"nested function cannot be accessed" error
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nobody puremagic.com
ReportedBy: kennytm gmail.com
May or may not be the same as issue 5939. Happens at least since 2.042.
Test case:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
auto f() {
static int h(int x) pure nothrow safe { return x*x*x-x*x; }
struct S {
int get() {
return h(8);
}
}
return S.init;
}
void main() {
typeof(f()) z;
assert(z.get == 448);
assert(z.get == 448);
}
-----------------------------------------------------------------
x.d(11): Error: function x.f is a nested function and cannot be accessed from
main
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The bug will appear only when the 'get' function
- is an auto-return function (e.g. ' property auto get()')
- or has no attributes at all (e.g. 'int get()')
The bug is gone when you supply at least one attribute to 'get', e.g. ' safe
int get()'.
I don't know if it is a reject-valid or accept-invalid.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 07 2011
d-bugmail puremagic.com
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5941
A slight variant is when 'f' is a template function taking a delegate literal
as input, it will generate an ICE:
---------------------------------
auto f(alias T)() {
static void h(){}
struct S {
void get() {
h();
}
}
return S();
}
void main() {
typeof(f!((){})()) z;
}
---------------------------------
Internal error: backend/cgcs.c 363
---------------------------------
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 07 2011
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5941
Don <clugdbug yahoo.com.au> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |clugdbug yahoo.com.au
Reduced test case suggests it's related to typeof():
auto fx() {
struct S {
void get() {}
}
return S.init;
}
void main() {
//auto w = fx(); // OK
typeof(fx()) z; // fails!
}
Again, adding any attributes to get() removes the bug -- even though get() is
never used.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Dec 21 2011
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5941
Don <clugdbug yahoo.com.au> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |accepts-invalid
In bug 5939, Walter explicitly stated that the test case is comment 2 is not a
bug. However, the fact that it compiles if the function 'get' is removed, or if
attributes are added to get(), is surely a bug. Based on Walter's comment, it
should never compile. So I'm marking as accepts-invalid.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Dec 21 2011
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5941
yebblies <yebblies gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |yebblies gmail.com
In case anyone's wondering about why adding attributes changes anything, the
compiler does a scan of all the top level members in a nested struct to
determine if it contains any functions, and makes it a static struct otherwise.
This is unfortunately done badly/too early and it finds AttributeDeclarations
containing functions but doesn't investigate further.
Given that, it sounds like the requirement for having no attributes is really
just a requirement for a non-static nested struct.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jan 18 2012
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5941
Maksim Zholudev <maximzms gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |maximzms gmail.com
PST ---
Linux, 64-bit
DMD from Git head
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/13b3bdbf3819fec810ebfb077957510612dfa815
0.
Compiling code from the description
(http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5941#c0):
--------------------
test.d(11): Error: cannot access frame pointer of test.f.S
--------------------
1.
Compiling code from comment 1
(http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5941#c1):
--------------------
test.d(11): Error: cannot access frame pointer of test.f!(function void()
{
}
).f.S
--------------------
2.
Compiling code from comment 2
(http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5941#c1):
--------------------
test.d(9): Error: cannot access frame pointer of test.fx.S
--------------------
Is this behavior correct?
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Mar 04 2013