bug-gnustep
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[bug #4189] broken bycopy in DO


From: nobody
Subject: [bug #4189] broken bycopy in DO
Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 07:26:05 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030401 Debian/1.0.2-2

=================== BUG #4189: LATEST MODIFICATIONS ==================
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?func=detailbug&bug_id=4189&group_id=99

Changes by: Stefan Urbanek <address@hidden>
Date: Fri 07/04/03 at 13:26 (Europe/Bratislava)

            What     | Removed                   | Added
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Resolution | Fixed                     | Later


------------------ Additional Follow-up Comments ----------------------------
To reply...

1.i do not think so. using type information from remote system is more logical.

2. it's not official way to use setProtocolForProxy:, but *recommendation* for 
performance reasons, so it should work without that.

3. yes it is, however, i should care about performance and optimalisation, 
after i have working application.

4. i disagree. having bycopy only in protocols is dumb, and if DO system 
fetches infromation from remotes object, it knows that arguments/return value 
is bycopy without needing any protocols.

Protocols are NOT core of DO, but are only helpers.




=================== BUG #4189: FULL BUG SNAPSHOT ===================


Submitted by: stefanu                 Project: GNUstep                      
Submitted on: Fri 07/04/03 at 00:40
Category:  Base/Foundation            Severity:  1 - Ordinary               
Bug Group:  Bug                       Resolution:  Later                    
Assigned to:  None                    Status:  In Test                      

Summary:  broken bycopy in DO

Original Submission:  if i have a method with bycopy return value on server 
side, i am getting remote objects on clients side insetad of copies. i have to 
explicitly cast on client side to some protocol with same method defined as 
bycopy to make it work. sometimes it is not possible to cast. The server side 
should be responsible and decides what objects are passed by copy or by 
reference.

This bug is related to one former - DO is using selector information from local 
runtime instead of distant runtime. this is wrong and makes it difficult to 
develop and debug DO applications.

Follow-up Comments
*******************

-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri 07/04/03 at 13:26         By: stefanu
To reply...

1.i do not think so. using type information from remote system is more logical.

2. it's not official way to use setProtocolForProxy:, but *recommendation* for 
performance reasons, so it should work without that.

3. yes it is, however, i should care about performance and optimalisation, 
after i have working application.

4. i disagree. having bycopy only in protocols is dumb, and if DO system 
fetches infromation from remotes object, it knows that arguments/return value 
is bycopy without needing any protocols.

Protocols are NOT core of DO, but are only helpers.


-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri 07/04/03 at 12:21         By: CaS
This works for me in the current CVS, but a few points are worth noting ...

1. Use of the type information from a remote system is a GNUstep extension and 
is not portable.

2. The official (OpenStep/MacOS-X)way of dealing with this is to use the 
setProtocolForProxy: method of NSDistantObject

3. The DO code is very inefficient if setProtocolForProxy: is not used, since 
it requires a round trip to determine type information, even when a typed 
selector is available locally.

4. DO kewords like bycopy and byref are only meaningful in protocols (they are 
ignored in class interfaces and implementations) ... so the bycopy return value 
on the server side must be declared in a protocol to which the
class of the server instance conforms.



CC list is empty


No files currently attached


For detailed info, follow this link:
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?func=detailbug&bug_id=4189&group_id=99

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]