Am 22.03.2013 12:43, schrieb Steve Hildebrandt:
Am 21.03.2013 22:00, schrieb Sven Barth:
On 21.03.2013 15:53, Steve Hildebrandt wrote:
Am 21.03.2013 11:51, schrieb Sven Barth:
Out of curiosity: Why did you add this?
To implement a less "hacky" way of generic method invokation.
Supporting several calling conventions I can call a method based on the
address and an array of const as parameters.
Without RTTI there would've been a need for hard coded meta
information,
wich is error prone and rather time consuming.
Since tkMethod supports RTTI any method contained in a record, class,
object would work without additional meta information.
Out of interest: do you support multiple platforms? Maybe if you want
to provide your code under modified LGPL we could use it once we have
the RTTI.TValue type and the extended RTTI to support RTTI.Invoke.
Sure i can provide the code. Some modifications would be needed, so it
is easier to adopt it to RTTI.Invoke.
Regarding the platforms:
Calling conventions 64bit : win64(the microsoft standart thing
dunno how its called right now)
32bit : stdcall, register.
Since the inline asm code for the actual call differs depending on
witch registers are used,
this part can't be handled in a generic way and needs to be coded
down for each convention.
While passing parameters on the Stack works rather generic(well
obtaining the stack pointer is the exception here).
Calculation of the stack offset/used register too is dependant on
the convention.
Hope this sums up what needs to be done to port the approach I took to
all platforms supported.
My idea for the extended RTTI was to let the compiler write out all
necessary information for parameter setting (and also retrieval for
TVirtualMethodInterceptor support) and then use some kind of mini-meta
assembly language to generate the final code.
Regarding the stack pointer:
http://www.freepascal.org/docs-html/rtl/system/sptr.html
I'm currently using this to call pascal procedures and use pascal
classes in LUA.
Without you showing what you changed we can not help much...
typinfo.pp :
tkMethod, tkProcVar: // simply added tkProcVar here
(MethodKind : TMethodKind;
ParamCount : Byte;
ParamList : array[0..1023] of Char
ncgrtti.pas:(Line 690)
procedure procvardef_rtti(def:tprocvardef);
...
begin
{ write method id and name }
if po_methodpointer in def.procoptions
then write_header(def,tkMethod)
else write_header(def,tkProcVar);
maybe_write_align;
...
So that RTTI generation for tkProcVar and tkMethod would only
differentiate in the TTypeKind field.
I can reproduce your problem, but I don't have a solution. At least
it is enough to only use that unit, so you could copy the unit
locally and comment everything until the problem disappears. This way
you could pinpoint what construct the problem is and then try to fix
the compiler. And if it then works without further problems we could
add this to trunk.
Narrowed it down to those 2 records :
type
jpeg_entropy_encoder = record
//test.lpr(23,1) Error: Undefined symbol: RTTI_$JPEGLIB_$$_DEF2
//ORIGINAL JPEGLib Line 539
//parameter MCU_data leads to the error
encode_mcu : function({cinfo : Pointer; }const MCU_data : array of
Pointer) : boolean;
end;
jpeg_entropy_decoder = record
//test.lpr(23,1) Error: Undefined symbol: RTTI_$JPEGLIB_$$_DEF5
//ORIGINAL JPEGLib Line 655
//parameter MCU_data leads to the error
decode_mcu : function({cinfo : Pointer; }var MCU_data : array of
Pointer) : boolean;
end;
But here I'm lost again.
Seems to be either related to the const/var, the open array (maybe the
hidden high parameter?) or a combination of both.
You could try to debug the compiler. Simply copy the above records to a
program unit, load the pp.lpi (or ppcx64.lpi for 64-bit), set up the run
parameters and the working directory correctly (if you don't have a
correct configuration for 2.7.1 you should use "-n -Fu..." to find the
correct RTL units) and then place breakpoints in ncgrtti to check
whether the correct data is generated.
Regards,
Sven
Regards,
Sven
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - [email protected]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
