OpenEuphoria

2. Re: Rob: Q: Constant Scope

• Posted by Robert Craig <rds at RapidEuphoria.com> Apr 19, 2005
• 537 views
• Last edited Apr 20, 2005

Vincent wrote:
> The ref manual says:
> "Constants may not be declared inside a subroutine." 
> "Constant declarations must be outside of any subroutine. Constants can
> be global or local, but not private."
> 
> Can you tell me why you made the language support only constant declera-
> tions at top-level, and not support it at routine level (private scope)?
> I'm just curious on why made it this way. What are the disadvantages?
> 
> I'm trying to figure out whether or not I want to add this functionability
> into my
> custom interpreter, and I wanted to know what you thought about
> it.

Here's something I wrote a few years ago, that discusses this issue
and a few other contentious issues:

http://www.listfilter.com/cgi-bin/esearch.exu?fromMonth=2&fromYear=7&toMonth=2&toYear=7&postedBy=rds&keywords=constant+scope+routine

In language design there is rarely a "right answer".
Things are very subjective.

> Another question... Is there anyway I can use global variables in
> Eu2C translated/compiled DLLs, being able to use define_c_var()?
> If not, could you consider, adding support for it in the next
> release? I tried making an example but it didnt work, maybe I did
> somthing wrong?

I have an example of define_c_var() in a Linux demo.
It lets the Euphoria program access a C variable in a shared library.
I don't know how well that works in the Windows world.
I think in Windows, it might only be routines that can be 
exported from a .dll, not variables. Maybe someone else here has tried it.

Regards,
   Rob Craig
   Rapid Deployment Software
   http://www.RapidEuphoria.com

4. Re: Rob: Q: Constant Scope

• Posted by Vincent <darkvincentdude at yahoo.com> Apr 20, 2005
• 526 views

Robert Craig wrote:
> 
> Vincent wrote:
> > The ref manual says:
> > "Constants may not be declared inside a subroutine." 
> > "Constant declarations must be outside of any subroutine. Constants can
> > be global or local, but not private."
> > 
> > Can you tell me why you made the language support only constant declera-
> > tions at top-level, and not support it at routine level (private scope)?
> > I'm just curious on why made it this way. What are the disadvantages?
> > 
> > I'm trying to figure out whether or not I want to add this functionability
> > into my
> > custom interpreter, and I wanted to know what you thought about
> > it.
> 
> Here's something I wrote a few years ago, that discusses this issue
> and a few other contentious issues:
> 
> <a
> href="http://www.listfilter.com/cgi-bin/esearch.exu?fromMonth=2&fromYear=7&toMonth=2&toYear=7&postedBy=rds&keywords=constant+scope+routine">http://www.listfilter.com/cgi-bin/esearch.exu?fromMonth=2&fromYear=7&toMonth=2&toYear=7&postedBy=rds&keywords=constant+scope+routine</a>
> 
> In language design there is rarely a "right answer".
> Things are very subjective.
> 

I see your point on how this can cause some confusion...

Your example: (slightly modified)

function aaa(integer z)
object d, e, f
constant a = 99 * foo()
integer b = 99 + bar() * 7, h, i, g = 777
atom c
g += 1
h = g
z = h
return z + b / a
end function

In your example, "integer b & g" uses assignment at declare and right
above it is "constant a", which must use that method--plus the mixed
types have the constant in the same group of code without seperation;
that could cause confusion to the untrained eye.

I was thinking about assignment at declare too as a syntax improvement,
but now I think if I were to add support for private constants within routines,
it would be better to leave it out, while still forcing it
upon constants. That alone greatly helps to destinguish constants from
variables.

New example:

function aaa(integer z)
    constant a = 99 * foo()

    object d, e, f
    integer b, h, i, g
    atom c

    b = 99 + bar() * 7
    g = 777
    g += 1
    h = g
    z = h

    return (z + (b / a))
end function

All the code in the example above has organized grouping: seperating
constant from types, assigment from decleration, and "return" from
the rest; along with the standard four space block indentation. That
organizes the code and eliminates any confusion.

> > Another question... Is there anyway I can use global variables in
> > Eu2C translated/compiled DLLs, being able to use define_c_var()?
> > If not, could you consider, adding support for it in the next
> > release? I tried making an example but it didnt work, maybe I did
> > somthing wrong?
> 
> I have an example of define_c_var() in a Linux demo.
> It lets the Euphoria program access a C variable in a shared library.
> I don't know how well that works in the Windows world.
> I think in Windows, it might only be routines that can be 
> exported from a .dll, not variables. Maybe someone else here has tried it.
> 

I was talking more about global variables being exported to translated +
compiled DLLs via Euphoria to C translator. I made a extremely simple
example, which didnt seem to work using define_c_var() with the DLL and variable
name (string). I think it would be worthwhile to add support
for this, even if it would'nt be a common use. Or is there something I'm
not understanding about all this?


Thanks,
Vincent


Without walls and fences, there is no need for Windows and Gates.

6. Re: Rob: Q: Constant Scope

• Posted by Robert Craig <rds at RapidEuphoria.com> Apr 20, 2005
• 526 views

Jason Gade wrote:
> copied from Rob Craig's post (a few years ago):
>     There's an optimization which is near the top of my list, that would
>      eliminate the need for copy-on-write in many cases. Consider:
> 
>                function sort(sequence s)
> 
>                    s[i] = ...
>  
>               end function
> 
>                sequence x
>                ...
>                x = {5,6,7,8}
>                ...
>                x = sort(x)
> 
>      It would be possible to detect that the value of x, as passed to
>      sort(), will never be needed again. The implementation could then
>      arrange that the value passed to sort() will have only *one* 
>      reference count (from s), rather than 2 (from x and s). This would 
>      eliminate the need for a copy.
> 
> I think that this is a very reasonable optimization that eliminates most 
> of the arguments for modifying "pass by reference" values.  Have you 
> ever implemented it?

No I haven't, but it's still near the top of my list.

Regards,
   Rob Craig
   Rapid Deployment Software
   http://www.RapidEuphoria.com

8. Re: Rob: Q: Constant Scope

• Posted by Matt Lewis <matthewwalkerlewis at gmail.com> Apr 20, 2005
• 528 views

Vincent wrote:
> 
> ----
> Another question... Is there anyway I can use global variables in
> Eu2C translated/compiled DLLs, being able to use define_c_var()?
> If not, could you consider, adding support for it in the next
> release? I tried making an example but it didnt work, maybe I did
> somthing wrong?

You could do this, but this probably only makes sense for integers, and
you'd have to be careful to keep them at 31 bits, because Euphoria would
interpret bigger things as either atoms or sequences.  You can take a look
at my contribution for passing 32-bit integers to a compiled euphoria 
routine for some additional insight into what sort of things would be
involved.

Matt Lewis

10. Re: Rob: Q: Constant Scope

• Posted by "Juergen Luethje" <j.lue at gmx.de> Apr 20, 2005
• 542 views

Brian Broker wrote:

> Robert Craig wrote:
>>
>> I don't know how well that works in the Windows world.
>> I think in Windows, it might only be routines that can be
>> exported from a .dll, not variables. Maybe someone else here has tried it.
>
> define_c_var() works just fine with DLLs (assuming the lib actually
> exports variables).


I translated the most simple sample DLL that I could think of, using
the official Eu 2.5 translator (compiled with Borland and Watcom) on
Windows 98:

------------[ file mydll.ew ]------------

global integer foo
foo = 123

-----------------------------------------


... and tested with the following code

include dll.e

constant
   lpLib = open_dll("mydll.dll"),
   lpFoo = define_c_var(lpLib, "foo")

? lpLib
? lpFoo

Output is
   6291456
   -1

What goes wrong here?

Regards,
   Juergen

12. Re: Rob: Q: Constant Scope

• Posted by "Juergen Luethje" <j.lue at gmx.de> Apr 24, 2005
• 541 views

Matt Lewis wrote:

> Juergen Luethje wrote:
>>
>> I translated the most simple sample DLL that I could think of, using
>> the official Eu 2.5 translator (compiled with Borland and Watcom) on
>> Windows 98:
>>
>> ------------[ file mydll.ew ]------------
>> }}}
<eucode>
>> global integer foo
>> foo = 123
>> </eucode>
{{{

>> -----------------------------------------

<snip>

> You need to change the declaration for foo.  In main_.h, you should see
>
>    extern int _1foo;
>
> Change this to:
>
>    extern _declspec(dllexport) _1foo;
>
> Now you should be able to:
> }}}
<eucode>
>    lpFoo = define_c_var(lpLib, "__1foo")
> </eucode>
{{{

> Note that bcc adds an extra underscore.  I don't think bcc allows you to
> put variables into the def file, so you seem to be stuck with the ugly
> name.  I haven't tried with any other compilers.

That works fine, thank you!
Well, the ugly name isn't a big issue for me, since it's only used once
in the define_c_var() function.

Now I know the reason for my previous confusion. I had assumed that the
translator automatically exports global variables from a DLL. Now I've read
the docs and saw, that this obviously isn't the case.

Thanks,
   Juergen