[m-rev.] for post-commit review: print more info for foreign types

Julien Fischer jfischer at opturion.com
Thu Jun 4 11:34:32 AEST 2015


Hi,

On Thu, 4 Jun 2015, Zoltan Somogyi wrote:

> On Mon, 01 Jun 2015 16:02:15 +0100, matthias.guedemann at googlemail.com (Matthias G├╝demann) wrote:
>> I agree, that arity would be helpful
>
> That is trivial to do. However, since I expect that 0 will be
> the most frequent arity by far, should it be printed only
> if it ISN'T zero? And why would one want to know the arity
> only, and not the identities of the argument types?

The argument types would be preferable.

>>  For the module qualification,
>> would it be possible to limit to types which can be ambiguous?
>
> Only at nontrivial expense.
>
> When the compiler generates the runtime type information (RTTI)
> that the debugger consults, it typically has access only to the one
> module being compiled. Another module may also define a type
> with the same name, but this may module may not be compiled
> or even written when the first is compiled. Any check for whether
> a type name is ambiguous or not therefore has to be done at link time
> or run time. I don't know of a way to do it at link time. Doing it
> at run time would require a check for whether it has already been done
> every time when the answer to the ambiguity question is needed.
>
> Another way to avoid unnecessary module qualification in some cases
> would be to simply not add the module qualification if the module name
> is the same as the type name.
>
> Any opinions on what behavior would be most useful? (I don't have
> any preference myself.)

Neither of the above.

Cheers,
Julien.


More information about the reviews mailing list