On Wednesday, 9 September 2015 at 10:23:55 UTC, chris stevens
wrote:
http://wiki.dlang.org/Dynamic_typing
This is what I saw that made me think that I could. Have had
another closer look and I do believe it's possible.
These are things I wrote, so let me explain how they work: they
do not attempt to actually run through the D compiler, but
instead use tagged memory to check it all at runtime.
This is kinda similar to creating a class, but it has no help
from the compiler and no static type checks.
So, let's say the user wanted to create an object with two
integers, x and y. Code like the jsvar in the link does it with
an associative array: var[string]. var is defined as a struct
with a storage variable for the data, and a variable saying what
type it is. All operations check that type variable. Then the
names are indexed through the hash map. This is like how
javascript engines work.
You could also do it a bit differently by making a type
definition for the whole object and allocating the memory that
way.
You can also go with the run the compiler and load a library
option. There's different pros and cons for each approach.
Here's some example code you might go with the second option: a
type definition and dynamically allocated memory:
---
struct ObjectHandle {
immutable(ObjectDefinition) type;
ubyte[] data;
ubyte[] getRawDataForField(string field) {
auto info = type.fields[field];
auto raw = data[info.offset .. info.offset + info.ti.tsize];
return raw;
}
string toString() {
string s = type.name ~ "_dynamic(\n";
foreach(fieldName, fieldDefinition; type.fields) {
s ~= "\t" ~ fieldName ~ ": " ~
typeToString(fieldDefinition.ti, getRawDataForField(fieldName));
s ~= "\n";
}
return s ~ ")";
}
}
class ObjectDefinition {
// OffsetTypeInfo is defined in object.d
// http://dlang.org/phobos/object.html#OffsetTypeInfo
//
// These TypeInfo things are D's built-in runtime reflection.
// We're borrowing that information and the types to create our
// own extensions.
OffsetTypeInfo[string] fields;
string name;
this(string name) {
this.name = name;
}
void addField(string type, string name) {
switch(type) {
case "int":
OffsetTypeInfo field;
field.ti = typeid(int);
field.offset = dataSize(); // you might also want to do some
alignment here...
fields[name] = field;
break;
// you can add other supported types here. You could even loop
through a list
// of them at compile time and generate this code btw.
default: assert(0, "unsupported type " ~ type);
}
}
int dataSize() const {
int size = 0;
foreach(k, v; fields)
size += v.ti.tsize;
return size;
}
// this is immutable because you don't want
// the layout to change after you've created it.
//
// So it forces the factory to be called only after
// the definition is set in stone.
ObjectHandle factory() immutable {
auto data = new ubyte[](this.dataSize()); // dynamically
allocate space for our object's variables...
foreach(k, field; fields) { // and now initialize them properly
auto i = cast(const(ubyte)[]) field.ti.init();
if(i.length)
data[field.offset .. field.offset +
field.ti.tsize] = i[];
}
return ObjectHandle(this, data); // and finally return it,
along with a reference to this so we can identify the type later
}
}
// Similarly to addField, doing operations on our field need to
dispatch based on
// type. I'll only show int. Others could be added in the if/else
chain, or also
// auto-generated by a compile time loop.
string typeToString(const(TypeInfo) t, const(ubyte)[] rawData) {
import std.conv;
if(t == typeid(int)) {
int i = *(cast(int*) rawData.ptr);
return to!string(i);
}
return null;
}
void main() {
auto definition = new ObjectDefinition("MyRuntimeType");
definition.addField("int", "x");
definition.addField("int", "y");
auto finalDefinition = cast(immutable) definition;
definition = null; // we can't edit it anymore, so nulling out
the mutable original reference
auto object = finalDefinition.factory();
auto rawData = object.getRawDataForField("x");
rawData[0] = 15; // since I know it is an int, I can do this now
// but in actual practice, you'd want to do some kind of
conversions and type checking based on the type field
// instead of poking raw memory
import std.stdio;
writeln(object.toString());
}
---
There's nothing really D specific in there so far, though the
compile time loops would be to add more types to support.
Supporting all types would be a lot of code and tricky in points.
Tying it into TypeInfo itself and actually making your dynamic
class available via static interfaces and other existing
facilities like Object.factory gets trickier.... but is doable.
You'd need to match the field layouts in your raw data, then fill
them in appropriately and poke the appropriate arrays in the
runtime.
Should be a learning experience if you actually want to run with
it!
