Re: Delegate, scope and associative array
On Tuesday, 3 June 2014 at 05:40:44 UTC, Edwin van Leeuwen wrote:
On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 23:44:01 UTC, Rene Zwanenburg wrote:
On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 20:09:12 UTC, Edwin van Leeuwen
wrote:
As you may have guessed, a workaround is to copy the iteration
variable yourself:
unittest {
size_t delegate()[size_t] events;
foreach(_i; 1..4 ) {
auto i = _i;
events[i] = { return i; };
}
assert( events[1]() == 1 );
}
This should work though it's less than ideal. There is an open
bug report:
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8621
Thanks for the suggestion and I just tried it, but it does not
work :(
In the original code were I discovered this problem I generated
the id with an outside function and that also didn't to work.
unittest {
size_t delegate()[size_t] events;
size_t i = 1;
events[i] = { return i; };
i = 2;
events[i] = { return i; };
i = 3;
events[i] = { return i; };
writeln( events[1]() );
assert( events[1]() == 1 );
}
Explicitly removing the loop still causes the same issue. In that
case I find it easier to understand, since it might be using the
value of i at the end of the scope. In the foreach case (and
especially when copying to a local variable) it is more puzzling
to me.
Re: Delegate, scope and associative array
On 06/02/2014 10:40 PM, Edwin van Leeuwen wrote:
On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 23:44:01 UTC, Rene Zwanenburg wrote:
On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 20:09:12 UTC, Edwin van Leeuwen wrote:
As you may have guessed, a workaround is to copy the iteration
variable yourself:
unittest {
size_t delegate()[size_t] events;
foreach(_i; 1..4 ) {
auto i = _i;
events[i] = { return i; };
}
assert( events[1]() == 1 );
}
This should work though it's less than ideal. There is an open bug
report:
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8621
Thanks for the suggestion and I just tried it, but it does not
work :(
In the original code were I discovered this problem I generated
the id with an outside function and that also didn't to work.
Here is a workaround:
unittest {
size_t delegate()[size_t] events;
auto makeClosure(size_t i) {
return { return i; };
}
foreach( i; 1..4 ) {
events[i] = makeClosure(i);
}
assert( events[1]() == 1 );
}
void main()
{}
Ali
Re: Delegate, scope and associative array
I've run across this myself. The workaround I used was to call a function from inside the foreach loop, and in that function you construct the delegate (with the index variable passed as a parameter).
Re: Delegate, scope and associative array
Hah, sorry, I didn't read the last post. I did exactly what Ali just suggested.
Re: Delegate, scope and associative array
On Tuesday, 3 June 2014 at 07:00:35 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
Here is a workaround:
unittest {
size_t delegate()[size_t] events;
auto makeClosure(size_t i) {
return { return i; };
}
foreach( i; 1..4 ) {
events[i] = makeClosure(i);
}
assert( events[1]() == 1 );
}
void main()
{}
Ali
Thank you Ali, that works beautifully and can be easily adapted
to the original (more complicated) case.
Cheers, Edwin
Re: Delegate, scope and associative array
Ali Çehreli:
Here is a workaround:
unittest {
size_t delegate()[size_t] events;
auto makeClosure(size_t i) {
return { return i; };
}
foreach( i; 1..4 ) {
events[i] = makeClosure(i);
}
You can also use two lambdas to do that, without the
makeClosure:
http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Closures/Value_capture#Less_Functional_Version
Also don't forget do make the foreach argument immutable (I think
this is a lost war for me. Even smart programmers like you stick
to the defaults, even when they are a design mistake of the
language. So immutability by default is very important).
Bye,
bearophile
Re: Delegate, scope and associative array
On Mon, 02 Jun 2014 19:43:58 -0400, Rene Zwanenburg
renezwanenb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 20:09:12 UTC, Edwin van Leeuwen wrote:
I'm probably missing something basic, but I am confused by what is
going on in the following code.
unittest {
size_t delegate()[size_t] events;
foreach( i; 1..4 ) {
events[i] = { return i; };
}
writeln( events[1]() ); // This outputs 3
assert( events[1]() == 1 );
}
I thought that i should be copied from the local scope and therefore
when I call events[1]() the return value should be 1, but in this case
it is 3 (it always seems to be the last value of i in the loop).
Cheers, Edwin
Yeah this is a known problem. At the moment the foreach loop is
internally rewritten to something like
int i = 1;
while(i 4)
{
// foreach loop body
++i;
}
While it usually would be preferrable if it were rewritten as
int __compilergeneratedname = 1;
while(__compilergeneratedname 4)
{
auto i = __compilergeneratedname++;
// foreach loop body
}
With the current approach every delegate refers to the same variable.
Another problem is that it's possible to alter the iteration index from
inside the foreach body.
As you may have guessed, a workaround is to copy the iteration variable
yourself:
unittest {
size_t delegate()[size_t] events;
foreach(_i; 1..4 ) {
auto i = _i;
events[i] = { return i; };
}
assert( events[1]() == 1 );
}
This should work though it's less than ideal. There is an open bug
report:
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8621
There is a school of thought (to which I subscribe) that says you
shouldn't allocate a separate closure for each loop iteration.
Basically, a closure will only use the stack frame of the calling
function, not any loop iteration.
This way, you can clearly delineate what scope the closure has, and avoid
unnecessary allocations.
-Steve
Re: Delegate, scope and associative array
On Tuesday, 3 June 2014 at 13:30:13 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: There is a school of thought (to which I subscribe) that says you shouldn't allocate a separate closure for each loop iteration. Basically, a closure will only use the stack frame of the calling function, not any loop iteration. This way, you can clearly delineate what scope the closure has, and avoid unnecessary allocations. This is already a level too deep - it closes over variables, not the stack frame. And from this point of view, the current behavior is clearly wrong, because there is a different variable in each iteration; it just happens to have the same name.
Re: Delegate, scope and associative array
On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 20:09:12 UTC, Edwin van Leeuwen wrote:
I'm probably missing something basic, but I am confused by what
is going on in the following code.
unittest {
size_t delegate()[size_t] events;
foreach( i; 1..4 ) {
events[i] = { return i; };
}
writeln( events[1]() ); // This outputs 3
assert( events[1]() == 1 );
}
I thought that i should be copied from the local scope and
therefore when I call events[1]() the return value should be 1,
but in this case it is 3 (it always seems to be the last value
of i in the loop).
Cheers, Edwin
Yeah this is a known problem. At the moment the foreach loop is
internally rewritten to something like
int i = 1;
while(i 4)
{
// foreach loop body
++i;
}
While it usually would be preferrable if it were rewritten as
int __compilergeneratedname = 1;
while(__compilergeneratedname 4)
{
auto i = __compilergeneratedname++;
// foreach loop body
}
With the current approach every delegate refers to the same
variable. Another problem is that it's possible to alter the
iteration index from inside the foreach body.
As you may have guessed, a workaround is to copy the iteration
variable yourself:
unittest {
size_t delegate()[size_t] events;
foreach(_i; 1..4 ) {
auto i = _i;
events[i] = { return i; };
}
assert( events[1]() == 1 );
}
This should work though it's less than ideal. There is an open
bug report:
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8621
Re: Delegate, scope and associative array
On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 23:44:01 UTC, Rene Zwanenburg wrote:
On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 20:09:12 UTC, Edwin van Leeuwen wrote:
As you may have guessed, a workaround is to copy the iteration
variable yourself:
unittest {
size_t delegate()[size_t] events;
foreach(_i; 1..4 ) {
auto i = _i;
events[i] = { return i; };
}
assert( events[1]() == 1 );
}
This should work though it's less than ideal. There is an open
bug report:
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8621
Thanks for the suggestion and I just tried it, but it does not
work :(
In the original code were I discovered this problem I generated
the id with an outside function and that also didn't to work.
