World: r3wp
[Red] Red language group
older newer | first last |
Dockimbel 19-Sep-2011 [3388] | I haven't decided yet on the implementation detail, but my current plan is to use a R3-like approach, passing messages to a lower-level layer wrote in Red/System. |
Kaj 19-Sep-2011 [3389] | Note that I'm only using variadic functions in the GTK binding so far. The issues in the other bindings are with regular functions |
Dockimbel 19-Sep-2011 [3390x2] | Are you using also function pointers only in GTK binding? |
Are you using function pointers only in GTK binding? | |
Kaj 19-Sep-2011 [3392x2] | No, there are callbacks in most bindings |
The crash on the older GTK on Syllable Server is gone | |
Dockimbel 19-Sep-2011 [3394] | Will it be wrappers written in RED upon read-io, write-io Red/System functions? Just to be sure there is no confusion: the read-io and write-io function mentioned in the slides have nothing to do with the REBOL homonyms. The Red/System ones are wrapper on CPU's IN and OUT instructions. |
Pekr 19-Sep-2011 [3395] | OK, thanks for the clarification ... |
Kaj 19-Sep-2011 [3396] | SDL audio still crashes |
Dockimbel 19-Sep-2011 [3397x2] | You should compile it in verbose mode (-v 6) and check the callbacks calling convention in the symbols block at the end of the compilation logs. |
It should be stdcall or cdecl. If you see ??, it means the compiler hasn't been able to solve it. | |
Kaj 19-Sep-2011 [3399] | Bingo, it says ?? for the audio callback |
Dockimbel 19-Sep-2011 [3400x3] | Ah! |
The ?? is the default value for cconv. When the compiler encounters a get-word!, it propagates the cconv from the function using it as argument. | |
How are you passing callbacks? Same way as with GTK binding through a variadic function? | |
Kaj 19-Sep-2011 [3403] | As I noted above, no variadic functions in the other bindings yet |
Dockimbel 19-Sep-2011 [3404] | Can you show me the code pattern you're using for the callbacks in SDL audio binding? |
Kaj 19-Sep-2011 [3405] | stream!: alias struct! [ ; data [binary!] index [binary!] rest [integer!] ] fetch-audio: function [ ; Read sound buffer to be played. [callback] source [stream!] sink [binary!] size [integer!] /local slice ][ slice: source/rest if slice > size [slice: size] ; copy-part source/index sink slice sdl-mix-audio sink source/index slice sdl-mix-max-volume source/index: source/index + slice source/rest: source/rest - slice ] |
Dockimbel 19-Sep-2011 [3406] | Ok, so how are you installing the fetch-audio callback? |
Kaj 19-Sep-2011 [3407x2] | desired/callback: as-integer :fetch-audio |
desired: declare sdl-audio-spec! | |
Dockimbel 19-Sep-2011 [3409x2] | Ok, so the cause is obvious, no way for the compiler to figure out the cconv in such case. |
I think that I will just accept both 'stdcall and 'cdecl attribute in cases like this where the compiler can't determine the right calling convention. I will also add a check at the end of the compilation to raise errors for unresolved calling conventions. | |
Kaj 19-Sep-2011 [3411] | That's nice, but why not default to cdecl? |
Dockimbel 19-Sep-2011 [3412] | The default needs to be a non-usable value for the compiler to be able to catch unresolved calling convention. If it's cdecl or stdcall, the compiler won't report the error which can lead to stack corruption at runtime. |
Kaj 19-Sep-2011 [3413] | Are you sure the current resolver is watertight, then? |
Dockimbel 19-Sep-2011 [3414x3] | The current resolver only works for simple cases, basically, only when you're directly passing a function pointer as argument to a function. |
I need to add the unresolved calling convention error routine. | |
When such error will be reported, users would need to provide manually this information, by adding 'cdecl or 'stdcall as attribute. | |
Kaj 19-Sep-2011 [3417] | I don't really see a connection between the function a pointer is passed to and the function that will eventually call it |
Dockimbel 19-Sep-2011 [3418] | Well, it depends if the function taking a function pointer is invoking it directly or if it's passing it to another function (local or imported). In the former case, the compiler can set the right cconv itself, in the latter case, it can't and need some help from the user. |
Kaj 19-Sep-2011 [3419] | Yes, so is the current inferer always guessing right? |
Dockimbel 19-Sep-2011 [3420x3] | Let me have a look at the specs, I remember there was an edge case documented there... |
No trace of any special cases in the specs anymore. So, the compiler is always guessing right, when it can guess. When it can't, it leaves the cconv in undetermined state (??). | |
The inferer is very simple, it just looks at the cconv of the calling function and propagates it to the callback. If the callback has already a cconv defined, it checks if both cconv matches, and raise an error if it's not the case. | |
Kaj 19-Sep-2011 [3423x2] | Not much to report yet, except this: |
bash-4.0# hello-SQLite-world SQLite version: 3.6.22 SQLite version number: 3006022 SQLite source ID: 2010-01-05 15:30:36 28d0d7710761114a44a1a3a425a6883c661f06e7 | |
Dockimbel 19-Sep-2011 [3425x2] | Good start! |
Ok, these are the changes I will make today wrt cconv resolution: - 'cdecl and 'stdcall keywords will be accepted as function attributes. - 'callback attribute remains, it lets the compiler decide on the cconv to apply. If it fails to solve it, an error will be raised and user will have to manually set it instead (replacing 'callback by 'cdecl or 'stdcall). | |
BrianH 19-Sep-2011 [3427] | You can only have one function attribute? |
Pekr 19-Sep-2011 [3428] | then we need typesets and attribute sets :-) |
Dockimbel 19-Sep-2011 [3429] | BrianH: no, there are several others that can be mixed together, but only one from [callback stdcall cdecl]. |
BrianH 19-Sep-2011 [3430] | So that means that any function declared as 'cdecl or 'stdcall can now be used as a callback? Or can all functions? |
Dockimbel 19-Sep-2011 [3431x2] | Only those having one of those above 3 attributes can be used as "callbacks". |
I think I see your concern. It might be probably less confusing to leave the 'callback keyword mandatory for "callbacks" and accept 'stdcall and 'cdecl as additional attributes, but it is a bit more verbose also. | |
Kaj 19-Sep-2011 [3433] | What's the difference between a cdecl callback and a regular cdecl function? |
Dockimbel 19-Sep-2011 [3434] | IIRC, no differences, the callback attribute was just meant to help the compiler figure out that the cconv has to be solved at compile-time. |
Kaj 19-Sep-2011 [3435] | I thought so, so why not drop the callback attribute and let the programmer decide whether it is used as a callback or not? |
Dockimbel 19-Sep-2011 [3436x2] | Yes, it would be the logical thing to do. |
But in such case, users woud have to always set the cconv manually and the compiler wouldn't be able to help catch errors. | |
older newer | first last |