I really appreciate it if anyone can especially comment on my question
#2:
It did not seem that I have to use the context from the running thread
in evaluating my script. The following worked in my tests:
(new Context()).evaluateString(threadScope, "myscriptsource",
"threadScript", 1, null);
This was based on the understanding that "You can create a scope using
one Context and then evaluate a script using that scope and another
Context ...".
Does this have any side effects?
Thanks,
Scott
On Mar 12, 1:22 am, scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a few related questions about the Dynamic Scope. In my
> application I execute a script which will call a java method to
> perform a standardalone task then it finishes the initial script
> execution. The standardalone java task executes another script which
> uses Dynamic Scope like what is listed in the Dynamic Scope sample
> code.
>
> 1 Context cx = Context.enter();
> 2 Scriptable instanceScope =
> cx.newObject(sharedScope);
> 3 instanceScope.setPrototype(sharedScope);
> 4 instanceScope.setParentScope(null);
> 5 cx.evaluateString(instanceScope, "myscriptsource",
> "instanceScript", 1, null);
>
> In my code I did not use a separate thread for this standalone task.
> It failed to find variable definition x defined in the instance scope
> when calling function f which is defined in the shared scope.
> Basically dynamic scope did not work.
>
> function f () { var y = x.property; return y;} // x is only defined
> in the local scope.
>
> In debugging it I found that since there was only 1 thread thus
> cx.topCallScope=the_original_script_scope and hence cx.topCallScope !=
> null when the dynamic scope code was executed thus it did not call
> ScriptRuntime.doToCall() and failed: "x" is not defined.
>
> Here are my questions:
>
> 1). In InterpretedFunction.exec():
>
> if (!ScriptRuntime.hasTopCall(cx)) {
> // It will go through "call" path. but they are equivalent
> return ScriptRuntime.doTopCall(
> this, cx, scope, scope, ScriptRuntime.emptyArgs);
> }
> return Interpreter.interpret(
> this, cx, scope, scope, ScriptRuntime.emptyArgs);
>
> The comment says that "they are equivalent" but
> ScriptRuntime.doTopCall() and Interpreter.interpret() yielded
> different results in my tests. It looked like that only
> ScriptRuntime.doTopCall() supports Dynamic Scope. Why can't we always
> use doTopCall()?
>
> 2). In Rihno document it says
>
> "You can create a scope using one Context and then evaluate a script
> using that scope and another Context ..."
>
> so I switched line 5 with the following:
>
> (new Context()).evaluateString(threadScope, "myscriptsource",
> "threadScript", 1, null);
>
> The Dynamic Scope worked in my setup. This is at odd with the
> statement "There should be one and only one Context associated with
> each thread that will be executing JavaScript." Was it wrong with my
> change?
>
> 3). When I launch a new thread for the Dynamic Code script it worked
> without using the trick listed in 2). My question is that should I
> always run the dynamic scope code in a separate thread if the Context
> associated to the current thread could be "contaminated" by other
> javascript processes?
>
> Any help or clarification is appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Scott
_______________________________________________
dev-tech-js-engine-rhino mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-js-engine-rhino
