On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 5:52 AM Rony G. Flatscher <rony.flatsc...@wu.ac.at> wrote:
> On 12.07.2024 01:16, Rick McGuire wrote: > > I still think the code refactoring I suggested is a good idea, which will > make things a bit cleaner. > > +1 > > However, I just realized that the original problem could have been fixed > by just adding > > enum TracePrefix; > > where the class definitions at the top of Activity.cpp are located. > > As the first error occurs with compiling the ArrayClass.cpp Activity.hpp > also got that definition added and it makes it compile. > > However, later when RexxActivation.cpp gets compiled the following error > gets raised: > > [ 17%] Building CXX object > CMakeFiles/rexx.dir/interpreter/execution/RexxActivation.cpp.obj > RexxActivation.cpp > D:\orx.work202312\main_trunk_20240312\trunk\interpreter\execution\RexxActivation.cpp(3674): > error C2664: 'void Activity::traceOutput(RexxActivation *,RexxString > *,TracePrefix,RexxObject *,RexxObject *)': cannot convert argument 3 from > 'RexxActivation::TracePrefix' to 'TracePrefix' > > Ah, that's because they are different types because of the RexxActivation qualification. Rick > ---rony > > > > On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 12:29 PM Rony G. Flatscher < > rony.flatsc...@wu.ac.at> wrote: > >> On 11.07.2024 18:26, Rick McGuire wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 12:20 PM Rony G. Flatscher < >> rony.flatsc...@wu.ac.at> wrote: >> >>> On 11.07.2024 17:52, Rick McGuire wrote: >>> >>> I'm going to answer this out of line because I want to answer the last >>> question first. >>> >>> Thank you! >>> >>> >>> The problem with the compile error results in how RexxActivation is >>> defined in Activity.hpp. It's declaration is just "class RexxActivation", >>> which tells the compiler that RexxActivation is a class...and nothing else. >>> This allows RexxActivation * to be used in prototypes since there is enough >>> information available for that purpose. To get the full definition of >>> RexxActivation, you would need to replace "class RexxActivation" with >>> "#include "RexxActivation.hpp". However, I suspect doing that will result >>> in some circular dependencies between the two header files. >>> >>> Indeed. >>> >>> >>> Any you would probably need to define Activity as friend to the >>> RexxActivation class to make that enum visible. >>> >>> Given the relationship between RexxActivation and Activity, and that >>> both classes need the information, having the enum defined in >>> RexxActivation feels like the wrong place to for that to be located. It >>> feels like it should belong in Activity. However, those values are really >>> only used for things created for RexxActivation. >>> >>> A better solution would be to refactor the code a bit. >>> Activity::traceOutput() . The first two lines of TraceOutput deal with the >>> creation of the TraceObject, which really should be something that the >>> RexxActivation is responsible for. Move the stuff involved with that to >>> RexxActivation and then only pass the constructed TraceObject to the >>> traceOutput() method which is now just responsible for handling the output. >>> Now there's no need for TracePrefix to be visible outside of >>> RexxActivation. >>> >>> There are the following places in Activity that cause the use of >>> traceOutput() directly and indirectly: >>> >>> - >>> >>> wholenumber_t Activity::error() >>> >>> /** Force error termination on an activity, returning the resulting REXX >>> error code. >>> * @return The resulting Rexx error code. */ >>> >>> - >>> >>> wholenumber_t Activity::error(ActivationBase *activation, DirectoryClass >>> *errorInfo) >>> >>> /** Force error termination on an activity, returning the resulting REXX >>> error code. >>> * @param activation The activation raising the error. >>> * @param errorInfo The directory containing the error condition >>> information. >>> * @return The Rexx error code. */ >>> >>> - >>> >>> wholenumber_t Activity::displayCondition(DirectoryClass *errorInfo) >>> >>> /** Display error information and traceback lines for a Syntax condition. >>> * @param errorInfo The condition object with the error information >>> * @return The major error code for the syntax error, if this is indeed >>> a syntax conditon. */ >>> >>> - >>> >>> void Activity::display(DirectoryClass *exobj) ... >>> >>> /** Display information from an exception object. *@param exobj The >>> exception object. */ >>> >>> - >>> >>> void Activity::displayDebug(DirectoryClass *exobj) >>> >>> /** Display information about an error in interactive debug. @param >>> exobj The exception */+ >>> >>> >>> >> Only the last two of these are relevant, since the others just call >> those. If the creation of the trace object is a method of RexxActivation(), >> that method is just called to get the information needed by traceOutput(). >> >> ah, ok, thank you! >> >> ---rony >> > > _______________________________________________ > Oorexx-devel mailing list > Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel >
_______________________________________________ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
