Difference between revisions of "Catcall Test Proposal"
(Short description of what we have implemented) |
(→New conformance rules) |
||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
== New conformance rules == | == New conformance rules == | ||
When the actual generic parameters are preceded by <e>variant</e> then the existing conformance rules apply, otherwise it has to be the same type. | When the actual generic parameters are preceded by <e>variant</e> then the existing conformance rules apply, otherwise it has to be the same type. | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{Note| This shows to be the most efficient way to validate existing code. For the Eiffel batch compiler, if the default was the existing rules, we would get about 40000 catcall violations. With the new default, we only get 2000 conformance errors.}} | ||
== New validity rules == | == New validity rules == |
Revision as of 15:49, 5 November 2007
This article describe an implementation made by Eiffel Software in October 2007 for a solution of the CATCALL issue. It is merely a variation of already explored solution.
Syntax changes
A Type declaration can be preceded by the keyword frozen
, that is to say:
a: frozen A
An actual generic parameter can be preceded by the keyword variant
, that is to say:
a: LIST [variant A]
New conformance rules
When the actual generic parameters are preceded by variant
then the existing conformance rules apply, otherwise it has to be the same type.
Note: This shows to be the most efficient way to validate existing code. For the Eiffel batch compiler, if the default was the existing rules, we would get about 40000 catcall violations. With the new default, we only get 2000 conformance errors.
New validity rules
- The target of a call involving a covariantly redefined routine should either be marked
frozen
or else the call has to be valid for all descendant types. - If the formal arguments of a call involves a formal generic parameter, the corresponding actual should not be marked
variant
.
Implementation details
The tricky part in the above is the checks for the validity of a covariant call for all the descendant types of the target. The issue is when a descendant type is generic and the new formal generic parameter has not corresponding type in the ancestor. For example:
class A f (a: ANY) do end end class B [G] inherit A redefine f end feature f (a: STRING) do end end class TEST feature make is local a: A do a.f ("My String") end end end
In our case, we assume the descendant type to be instantiated with its constraint, in the above case B [ANY]
.