CEDET

I have checked in changes or this, in addition to fixing egregious
errors I made in my last check in.

To get this to work, it also needs to allow saving of static method
return values for later return.

What is the return value if there are no primary or static methods?
At the moment nil.

I have encountered no problems with any of my other tools so far,
though I have not done a whole lot with them yet.

Eric

>>> drkm <darkman_spam@...> seems to think that:
>  Hi
>
>  I found that the value of a generic function call is not correct.
>When :AFTER methods exist, the value of the last called become the
>value of the generic call.  But the value of the generic call must be
>always the value of the primary method called.  Example:
>
>    (defclass A () ())
>
>    (defmethod F ((a A))
>      (message "primary"))
>
>    (defmethod F :AFTER ((a A))
>      (message ":after"))
>
>    (F (A nil))
>
>       ==> ":after"
>
>  I suppose the following patch resolves the problem, but it seems
>some code in SemanticDB rely on the value being the value of
>the :AFTER method.
>
>*** eieio.el-orig	Fri Jul 30 19:59:54 2004
>--- eieio.el	Thu Mar 10 12:30:32 2005
>***************
>*** 1568,1574 ****
>  	    (let ((scoped-class (cdr (car lambdas)))
>  		  (eieio-generic-call-key (car keys)))
>  	      (setq found t)
>! 	      (setq rval (apply (car (car lambdas)) newargs))))
>  	(setq lambdas (cdr lambdas)
>  	      keys (cdr keys)))
>        (if (not found)
>--- 1568,1576 ----
>  	    (let ((scoped-class (cdr (car lambdas)))
>  		  (eieio-generic-call-key (car keys)))
>  	      (setq found t)
>! 	      (if (= eieio-generic-call-key method-primary)
>! 		  (setq rval (apply (car (car lambdas)) newargs))
>! 		(apply (car (car lambdas)) newargs))))
>  	(setq lambdas (cdr lambdas)
>  	      keys (cdr keys)))
>        (if (not found)
>
>--drkm
>
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------
>SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
>Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
>Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
>http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
>_______________________________________________
>Cedet-devel mailing list
>Cedet-devel@...
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cedet-devel
>

-- 
          Eric Ludlam:                 zappo@..., eric@...
   Home: http://www.ludlam.net            Siege: http://www.siege-engine.com
Emacs: http://cedet.sourceforge.net               GNU: http://www.gnu.org

Good idea.  I've checked in a version and test of this.

Eric

>>> drkm <darkman_spam@...> seems to think that:
>  Hi
>
>  Accessors for slots whose the allocation slot option is :class would
>have to be :static methods, wouldn't they?
>
>  Is this patch of some help?
>
>*** eieio.el-orig	Fri Jul 30 19:59:54 2004
>--- eieio.el	Mon Mar  7 14:45:11 2005
>***************
>*** 520,526 ****
>  	(if acces
>  	    (progn
>  	      (eieio-defmethod acces
>! 		(list (list (list 'this cname))
>  		      (format
>  		       "Retrieves the slot `%s' from an object of class `%s'"
>  		       name cname)
>--- 520,527 ----
>  	(if acces
>  	    (progn
>  	      (eieio-defmethod acces
>! 		(list (if (eq alloc ':class) ':STATIC ':PRIMARY)
>!                       (list (list 'this cname))
>  		      (format
>  		       "Retrieves the slot `%s' from an object of class `%s'"
>  		       name cname)
>
>--drkm
>
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------
>SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
>Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
>Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
>http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
>_______________________________________________
>Cedet-devel mailing list
>Cedet-devel@...
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cedet-devel
>

-- 
          Eric Ludlam:                 zappo@..., eric@...
   Home: http://www.ludlam.net            Siege: http://www.siege-engine.com
Emacs: http://cedet.sourceforge.net               GNU: http://www.gnu.org

I have something that now passes this test checked in.

Eric

>>> drkm <darkman_spam@...> seems to think that:
>  Hi
>
>  It seems that we can't call a static method on an object, instead of
>on a class.  For example:
>
>    (defclass A ()
>      ())
>
>    (defmethod F :STATIC ((class A))
>      (message "F A"))
>
>    (F A)
>    (F (A nil))
>
>  The first call works, but not the second one, which results in the
>following error:
>
>    no-method-definition F "#<A nil>"
>
>  Here is the patch I use for a long time:
>
>*** eieio.el-orig	Fri Jul 30 19:59:54 2004
>--- eieio.el	Mon Mar  7 14:36:14 2005
>***************
>*** 1533,1546 ****
>      ;; 2) Only call static if this is a static method.
>      ;; 3) Only call specifics if the definition allows for them.
>      ;; 4) Call in order based on :BEFORE, :PRIMARY, and :AFTER
>!     (if static
>! 	(progn
>! 	  (setq tlambdas
>! 		(eieio-generic-form method method-static mclass))
>! 	  (setq lambdas (cons tlambdas lambdas)
>! 		keys (cons method-static keys))
>! 	  )
>!       
>        ;; Non-static calls do all this stuff.
>        (setq tlambdas
>  	    (or (and mclass (eieio-generic-form method method-after mclass))
>--- 1533,1539 ----
>      ;; 2) Only call static if this is a static method.
>      ;; 3) Only call specifics if the definition allows for them.
>      ;; 4) Call in order based on :BEFORE, :PRIMARY, and :AFTER
>!     (when (object-p firstarg)
>        ;; Non-static calls do all this stuff.
>        (setq tlambdas
>  	    (or (and mclass (eieio-generic-form method method-after mclass))
>***************
>*** 1560,1565 ****
>--- 1553,1564 ----
>        (setq lambdas (cons tlambdas lambdas)
>  	    keys (cons method-before keys))
>        )
>+     (unless (find-if (lambda (x) x) lambdas)
>+       (setq tlambdas
>+             (eieio-generic-form method method-static mclass))
>+       (setq lambdas (cons tlambdas lambdas)
>+             keys (cons method-static keys))
>+       )
>      ;; Now loop through all occurances forms which we must execute
>      ;; (which are happilly sorted now) and execute them all!
>      (let ((rval nil) (found nil))
>
>--drkm
>
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------
>SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
>Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
>Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
>http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
>_______________________________________________
>Cedet-devel mailing list
>Cedet-devel@...
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cedet-devel
>

>>> drkm <darkman_spam@...> seems to think that:
>drkm <darkman_spam@...> writes:
>
>> "Eric M. Ludlam" <eric@...> writes:
>
>>>   I checked in changes to eieio to do this mechanism for method calls.
>>> I submitted a new test file for methodinvocation tests.
>
>>   Good news.
>
>  I just take a look at this new file.  In the second test, you
>include (F :PRIMARY B-base2) in the result, if I understand.  IMHO, it
>must not be there.

I restored the original behavior here.

  [ ... ]
>  BTW, in the first test, I think it's better to not define
>(F :PRIMARY AAA).  So the result will have to be:
>
>    (F :BEFORE AAA)
>    (F :BEFORE AA)
>    (F :BEFORE A)
>    (F :PRIMARY AA)
>    (F :AFTER A)
>    (F :AFTER AA)
>    (F :AFTER AAA)

I changed the test to this.

>  I guess starting at different "levels" could be better for testing.
>Maybe introduce a "hole" in the :BEFORE and :AFTER lists could be of
>some benefit, too.  Like something like that:
>
>    (F :BEFORE AAA)
>    (F :BEFORE A)
>    (F :PRIMARY AA)
>    (F :AFTER A)
>    (F :AFTER AAA)
>
>  To be sure the implementation don't just walk in the class
>inheritence graph until some nil is encountered (or something like
>that).
  [ ... ]

This was a good suggestion as it revealed a bug.  I have a method
optimizer which conflicts with the new method-list generator, so I
ended up with 2 calls to the A implementation of F :BEFORE.  I checked
in a fix for this also.

Now perhaps I can get to some of your other messages. ;)

Eric

-- 
          Eric Ludlam:                 zappo@..., eric@...
   Home: http://www.ludlam.net            Siege: http://www.siege-engine.com
Emacs: http://cedet.sourceforge.net               GNU: http://www.gnu.org