Bug 5033 – Add explicit 'frame context' and 'this' type modifiers for callback functions
Status
RESOLVED
Resolution
WONTFIX
Severity
enhancement
Priority
P2
Component
dmd
Product
D
Version
D2
Platform
Other
OS
All
Creation time
2010-10-10T12:38:00Z
Last change time
2017-07-21T04:20:04Z
Assigned to
nobody
Creator
ah08010-d
Comments
Comment #0 by ah08010-d — 2010-10-10T12:38:48Z
When dealing with other languages, it is common to have to pass a function (not delegate) pointer to a callback. Nearly as common is a "void*" extra parameter that will be passed to the callback as "user data".
I think it would be very much in the spirit of D to add parameter notations so that a void* "user data" pointer could be automatically understood to either be a frame context or 'this'.
Given a callback scenario, there is typically some third-party library function that accepts either a function pointer as a parameter, or expects that a callback has been "registered" with the library:
thirdparty_register_callback( &myfunc );
// ...
thirdparty_dosomething( arg1, arg2, userdata );
The library will then invoke the callback function with some set of arguments, including the "userdata" extra argument.
static ReturnT myfunc( T arg, void * userdata ) { ... }
In many cases, it is desirable to use nested functions or object methods for these callbacks. The standard approach for object methods would be to create a wrapper function that converts the userdata into an object reference, and then hands control to a the desired method.
When the callback is a nested function, either the userdata points to exactly one item from the enclosing scope, or an aggregate has to be created that includes all the necessary data.
** Object Context **
A special parameter type qualifier is used: @this. Because of the expected usage (in callbacks), @this is an alias for 'void *'. The difference is that the method is compiled using that parameter as the implicit 'this' pointer.
class Node {
string data;
bool matchesString( immutable(char) * cstring, @this ) {
string cstr = cstring[ 0 .. data.length ]; // NOTE: use of 'data'
return cmp( data, cstr ) == 0;
}
}
// ...
thirdparty_register_callback( &Node.matchesString );
thirdparty_search_something( &some_node );
I suppose the @this parameter could have a name, which would be equivalent to aliasing the name to this. I don't see a lot of value in that, however.
** Frame Context **
A delegate is a "fat pointer" which has two parts. The .funcptr part is the address of the actual code of the function. The .ptr part is a pointer to some address that gives the delegate access to the stack frame of the caller.
If a delegate's .funcptr is given as a callback address, the .ptr element can be passed as the userdata part. A special parameter type qualifier is used: @outer. @outer appears to be an alias for void *, as above. But it should be understood by the compiler to be the '.ptr' member. This provides enough info for the delegate to act like a delegate:
void outer() {
string data;
bool inner( immutable(char) * cstring, @outer ) {
string cstr = cstring[ 0 .. data.length ]; // NOTE: use of 'data'
return cmp( data, cstr ) == 0;
}
thirdparty_register_callback( (&inner).funcptr );
// ...
thirdparty_search_something( ..., (&inner).ptr );
}
(Frankly, the &inner.ptr could probably use some syntactic sugar, too. But it works.)
The @outer parameter could have a name, which might be useful for calls to other sibling functions via the thirdparty mechanism. But that seems less likely.
Comment #1 by dlang-bugzilla — 2017-07-21T04:19:56Z
I believe that this enhancement request is today possible to implement on top of D's existing introspection / metaprogramming / code-generation features.
In either case, today enhancement requests to the language itself need to be presented as a D Improvement Proposal:
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs
Please file a DIP if you think this proposal still has merit today. The current DIP manager can assist you through the process.