r3wp [groups: 83 posts: 189283]
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

World: r3wp

[Red] Red language group

Dockimbel
17-Sep-2011
[3338]
Good! I will make a new 0.2.2 release asap to avoid such issues with 
the older version.
MagnussonC
17-Sep-2011
[3339]
GTK-input-field.reds compiles OK and catches the input, but exe also 
gives *** Runtime Error 1: access violation at: 63A45193h
Dockimbel
17-Sep-2011
[3340]
I have a similar error here. It's on my todo list, I'll investigate 
that issue in a couple of hours.
Kaj
17-Sep-2011
[3341]
That looks like the error I'm getting on Linux on an older GTK version
Dockimbel
17-Sep-2011
[3342x5]
The crash is occuring in the 'action callback function.
It seems to happen on callback exit.
I think I get what is going wrong: the action handler calling convention 
is inferred as stdcall, because it is passed to a Red/System 'button 
function. But this function is passing it to an imported C function, 
so the hanlder's calling convention should be cdecl.
The compiler can't infer correctly in such case, so we need a way 
to force the cdecl convention on the callback function.
I guess a solution could be to implement a 'cdecl attribute support, 
to be able to manually force the right convention. But that would 
make things it a bit more complicated for the GTK binding user. 


Another option would be to define a trampoline function in the GTK 
binding that would call the user callback. That trampoline function 
would be directly (no nested calls) passed as argument to the imported 
function, so the compiler could infer its calling convention correctly.
Kaj
17-Sep-2011
[3347x2]
I was suspecting something like that. I hope it also helps the Linux 
and SDL cases
It could also be what went wrong for Jocko with cURL on Windows
Dockimbel
17-Sep-2011
[3349]
It's probable if you're not passing callbacks directly to their caller 
function. So, what option for solving it do you prefer?
Kaj
17-Sep-2011
[3350]
Thinking. I'm a bit foggy today
Dockimbel
17-Sep-2011
[3351]
Ah, I know that feeling very well. :-)
Kaj
17-Sep-2011
[3352]
Have to get back into Red. I've been looking into Freecoin and other 
stuff for a few days
Dockimbel
17-Sep-2011
[3353]
How complicated would it be to make a Red binding for Freecoin?
Kaj
17-Sep-2011
[3354x3]
Red would be more suitable than Red/System
It's quite a mess, and that's why everybody is rewriting stuff
Freecoin still has the Bitcoin interface, so you'd have to do JSON 
with a daemon. Not very comfortable until you have PARSE
Dockimbel
17-Sep-2011
[3357]
I see. I haven't looked yet at Freecoin source code.
Kaj
17-Sep-2011
[3358x5]
LibBitcoin has bindings, so you could bind to the C interface. But 
they're using 64 bits numbers everywhere, so that would be uncomfortable 
until Red/System has them
Freecoin doesn't seem to use LibBitcoin at all yet
I've decided to first port some of it to Syllable and wait a while 
with the bindings
There are also horrible heaps of C++ dependencies
On the callback matter, wouldn't it be better to always generate 
them as cdecl?
Dockimbel
17-Sep-2011
[3363]
Maybe.
Kaj
17-Sep-2011
[3364]
I don't see how a trampoline would work very well, because we're 
talking user written callbacks, so each would need its own trampoline
Dockimbel
17-Sep-2011
[3365]
No, only your GTK dialect API would need them (one for button, one 
for window, ...).
Kaj
17-Sep-2011
[3366]
The callbacks can have different numbers of arguments, and the widgets 
will eventually have multiple callbacks
Dockimbel
17-Sep-2011
[3367x3]
Ah, I thought that "action" callback would all share the same definition.
callbacks
Anyway, forcing cdecl for all callbacks might be a better option. 
I would need to check first if there's no internal compiler drawback 
on this option.
Kaj
17-Sep-2011
[3370]
Not always. You can for example pass gtk-quit without parameters, 
while the regular number of parameters is two
Dockimbel
17-Sep-2011
[3371]
If I force the 'action callback in the GTK script to 'cdecl (by hardcoding 
it in the compiler), it's not crashing anymore. So the cause is confirmed.
Kaj
17-Sep-2011
[3372]
Cool
Dockimbel
17-Sep-2011
[3373]
Just thinking about a drawback for your proposition: Windows API 
expects callbacks using stdcall convention...
Kaj
17-Sep-2011
[3374]
I'm falling apart here. I'm going to sleep
Dockimbel
17-Sep-2011
[3375]
Same here.
Kaj
17-Sep-2011
[3376x2]
:-)
In C system programs it's common to specify the calling convention. 
It's probably reasonable to require an attribute, but I would say 
callbacks for Windows are the exception that would require one
Dockimbel
18-Sep-2011
[3378]
Red/System uses stdcall too internally, so forcing user to use a 
cdecl attribute for Red level callbacks is not natural. Need to think 
more about it to find a better option.
Kaj
18-Sep-2011
[3379]
No, I mean to default to cdecl - which I thought was already implied 
by CALLBACK - and require to add stdcall only for Windows system 
callbacks
Dockimbel
18-Sep-2011
[3380]
I don't think it is a good solution to put the burden on Windows 
users only.
Kaj
18-Sep-2011
[3381x2]
It's only for Windows system callbacks. Most all other libraries 
on Windows use cdecl, and it is only for callbacks, not for general 
Windows system functions
If stdcall would be the default, even Windows users would have to 
write it many more times than the other way around
Kaj
19-Sep-2011
[3383]
I've started on an SQLite binding
Dockimbel
19-Sep-2011
[3384x3]
Ah, nice :-)
I have documented the calling convention issue here: https://github.com/dockimbel/Red/issues/176
I think it should be reasonable enough to choose cdecl when a function 
pointer is passed to a variadic function.
Pekr
19-Sep-2011
[3387]
Doc - I noticed (in your presentation), that port! dtype will be 
supported. I wondered how IO is going to be done,e.g. networking,or 
files. Will it be wrappers written in RED upon read-io, write-io 
Red/System functions?