Can you check in what you have then (ignoring my suggestion).

Let's get a solution for the immediate problem and open a new 'improvement' with these suggestions.

On 2009-01-12, at 00:36EST, Donald Anderson wrote:


On Jan 11, 2009, at 1:52 PM, P T Withington wrote:

I think here:

boolean withThis = options.getBoolean(Compiler.WITH_THIS) && ! isStatic;

You should be saying:

  // If the locals are not remapped, we assume we are in a runtime
  // that already does implicit this in methods...
boolean withThis = options.getBoolean(Compiler.WITH_THIS) && ! isStatic && remaplocals();

(removing the remaplocals() test from here:

  if ((! free.isEmpty()) && withThis && remapLocals()) {

where it is now redundant. Basically, you turn off withThis if you already have implicit this, right?

And here:

      if (isStatic) {
        frag += " { _1 }}).call(null);";
      }
      else {
        frag += " with (this) { _1 }}).call(this);";
      }

you should be using `withThis` not `isStatic`, otherwise you are unnecessarily inserting a `with (this)` in the try closure.

Although these seem good to me, if I make these changes, all the SWF9 applications I create come up blank.
I can investigate tomorrow.



And, if you don't need to wrap a `with (this)` around the body, remind me again why the body has to be put in a closure at all?

It doesn't strictly have to be a closure, but this seemed the cleanest way to preserve the behavior of return statements. And if there is no 'return' statement and one is required, we want to issue an error just like SWF9 does. I have annotated LPP-7514 with the chain of thought and test cases that led to the use of closures.

- Don


On 2009-01-11, at 11:14EST, Donald Anderson wrote:

Change 20090111-dda-y by [email protected] on 2009-01-11 10:54:15 EST
 in /Users/dda/laszlo/src/svn/openlaszlo/trunk-c
 for http://svn.openlaszlo.org/openlaszlo/trunk

Summary: Remove references to 'this' in static functions (revised 2)

New Features:

Bugs Fixed: LPP-7514 (Compilation error when setting compiler.swf9.catcherrors=true in lps.properties)

Technical Reviewer: ptw (pending)
QA Reviewer: (pending)
Doc Reviewer: (pending)

Documentation:

Release Notes:

Details:
 ** This changeset under consideration for 4.2.0.1

[This changeset is a second revision of an earlier changeset, to ensure the new test case listed in the JIRA runs correctly. Everything indicated under Tests has been retested with this revision.]

The implementation of catchFunctionExceptions (catcherrors) was blind to static functions,
 'this' cannot be used in static functions.

To tell that a function is static, this changeset peeks up the tree to the parent of the function node, which should be a ASTModifiedDefinition ('moddef'), and checks the static flag there. A shortcut in copying part of the tree without the moddef needed to be fixed, to do that, a 'shallow copy' function was added to the moddef class.

An alternate way of detecting static-ness is to set a 'static' property in the options. I had tried in addressing LPP-5813 (not yet completed), and had some trouble getting it to work. It's not clear which one is cleaner, but the one that works wins for me.

This fix is slightly more encompassing than it needs to be, it also disables any possibility of applying the WITH_THIS directive within a static function. This should always be
 correct.

This changeset also fixes a bug in that previously, ASTFunctionExpressions were not considered for the 'try/catch' treatment. This effectively excluded state methods, and probably some other important cases. Fixing this exposed an error in smoketest
 (only shown when catcherrors is true).

     Tests: 880 Failures: 1 Errors: 1
TestFailure: «<IntentionalErrors>»/testUndefinedErrors failed: Total number of expected errors: expected 1 got 0 TestError: «<IntentionalErrors>»/testUndefinedErrors failed: Wrong error: expected «function» got 'testing: 1, 2, 3'

ptw believes this test case should be rewritten: That error is because that test is using arguments.callee to fake a closure (which is not going to work because the transform moves the code to an inner closure, and arguments.callee no longer gets it to the original function.


Tests:
(dhtml,swf8,swf9) x (lzpix,weather,smokecheck,hello) x (enable catcherrors, disable catcherrors) -- smokecheck error for swf9 x smokecheck x (enable catcherrors) as noted above.


Files:
M WEB-INF/lps/server/src/org/openlaszlo/sc/ JavascriptGenerator.java
M      WEB-INF/lps/server/src/org/openlaszlo/sc/CommonGenerator.java
M      WEB-INF/lps/server/src/org/openlaszlo/sc/CodeGenerator.java
M WEB-INF/lps/server/sc/src/org/openlaszlo/sc/parser/ ASTModifiedDefinition.java

Changeset: http://svn.openlaszlo.org/openlaszlo/patches/20090111-dda-y.tar



--

Don Anderson
Java/C/C++, Berkeley DB, systems consultant

voice: 617-306-2057
email: [email protected]
www: http://www.ddanderson.com








--

Don Anderson
Java/C/C++, Berkeley DB, systems consultant

voice: 617-306-2057
email: [email protected]
www: http://www.ddanderson.com







Reply via email to