This fixes the problem of using the return value of a function as an
element in a compound initializer. The cause of the problem is that
compound initializers were represented by block expressions, but
function calls are contained within block expressions, so def
initialization saw the block expression and thought it was a nested
compound initializer.
Technically, it was a bug in the nested element parsing code in that it
wasn't checking the result value of the block expression, but using a
whole new expression type makes things much cleaner and the work done
paves the way for labeled initializers and compound assignments.
Multi-line calls (especially messages) got rather confusing to read as
the lines jumped back and forth. Now the binding is better but the dags
code is reordering the parameters sometimes.
This reverts commit a2f203c840.
There is indeed a world of difference between "any" and "only", and it
helps if I read the rest of the docs AND the code :P.
While expression symbols worked for what they are, they weren't so good
for ivar access because every ivar of a class (and its super classes)
would be accessed at method scope creation, generating spurious access
errors if any were private. That is, when the access checks worked at
all.
This is for adding methods to classes and protocols via their interface,
not for adding methods by adding protocols (they still get copied).
Slightly more memory efficient.
Unlike gcc, qfcc requires foo to be defined, not just declared (I
suspect this is a bug in gcc, or even the ObjC spec), because allowing
forward declarations causes an empty (no methods) protocol to be
emitted, and then when the protocol is actually defined, one with
methods, resulting in two different versions of the same protocol, which
comments in the gnu objc runtime specifically state is a problem but is
not checked because it "never happens in practice" (found while
investigating gcc's behavior with @protocol and just what some of the
comments about static instance lists meant).
It proved to be too fragile in its current implementation. It broke
pointers to incomplete structs and switch enum checking, and getting it
to work for other things was overly invasive. I still want the encoding,
but need to come up with something more robust.a
Such declarations were being lost, thus in the following, the id field
never got added:
typedef struct qwaq_mevent_s {
int id;
int x, y, z;
int buttons;
} qwaq_mevent_t;
The addition of xdef data has made qfo_to_progs unusable in qfprogs,
resulting in various invalid memory accesses. It always was an ugly hack
anyway, so this is the first step to proper qfo support in qfprogs.
I was originally going to put it in the debug syms file, but I realized
that the data persistence code would need access to both def type and
certainly correct def offsets for defs in far data.
This far better reflects the actual meaning. It is very likely that
ty_none is a holdover from long before there was full type encoding and
it meant that the union in qfcc's type_t had no data. This is still
true for basic types, but only if not a function, field or pointer type.
If the type was function, field or pointer, it was not true, so it was
misnamed pretty much from the start.
The encoding is 3:5 giving 3 bits for alignment (log2) and 5 bits for
size, with alignment in the 3 most significant bits. This keeps the
format backwards compatible as until doubles were added, all types were
aligned to 1 word which gets encoded as 0, and the size is unaffected.
This fixed the uninitialized temp warning in HUD.r. The problem was
caused by the flow analyzer not being able to detect that the struct
temp was being initialized by the move statement due to the address of
the temp being in a pointer temp. While it would be good to use a
constant pointer for the address of the struct temp or improving the
flow analyzer to track actual data, avoiding the temp in the first place
results in nicer code as it removes a move statement.
Only as scalars, I still need to think about what to do for vectors and
quaternions due to param size issues. Also, doubles are not yet
guaranteed to be correctly aligned.
