On 23 November 2012 11:07, Ciprian Teodorov <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Nov 22, 2012 11:23 PM, "Igor Stasenko" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On 22 November 2012 20:22, Ciprian Teodorov <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Igor,
>> >
>> > My bet ... extracting the nbXAtOffset to the TNBMemoryAccessors broke
>> > the
>> > callbacks since I have also removed the ulongAt: and ulongAt:put:
>> > accessors
>> > which are used by the callback counter (there are some strange argument
>> > conversions going on).
>> >
>> > Though if I merge your .78.mcz with my .83.mcz all tests pass ...
>> >
>> > I don't know what you think about having the memory accessors in a
>> > trait?
>> > the bad thing is that I do not see any way of sharing them with the ones
>> > from ByteArray (can we extend a class with traits?)...
>>
>> hmm.. i think we can't because  that will make Collections package dirty.
>> So, there's not much choice: we should use only extension methods.
>> What i thinking is getting rid of ulongAt/put protocols, and use uint32
>> instead
>> to be more precise and to not confuse with C types.
> That's what I have tried to do in my last 3 commits, but there seems to be
> some strange border effect (with callback counter) that I did not see
> coming. I'll look into it during the WE.
>

yes, i merged with your code and now running callback test is crashing VM.
i will try to figure what's going on.

> Cheers
>
-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.

Reply via email to