Doesn't have timestamps at this stage, but otherwise it reflects the
event system I had in my old text UI which was heavily based on
TurboVision. TV is pretty good (after looking at things a bit closer I
found it wasn't as deep as I thought), and better yet, Borland released
it to the public domain 23 years ago! (wish I'd known that).
Anyway, this commit gets something happening on the screen, even though
the current hierarchy is still a mess.
As well as $prefix/include, of course. This fixes the problem with
external ruamoko builds failing due to keys.h and qfcc's "lockdown" on
system headers.
This is horrible, doesn't work, isn't really the direction I want to go
(that became apparent while implementing Screen's handleEvent) and
crashes anyway (Array and not-id...)
*sigh*
Still, this does have some good stuff in it, and it pushed qfcc along
some more.
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.
Copying methods is done when adding protocols to classes (the current
use for adding regular methods is an incorrect solution to a different
problem). However, when a method is added to a class, the type of its
self parameter is set to be a pointer to the class. Thus, not only does
the method need to be copied, the self parameter does too, otherwise
the self parameter of methods added via protocols will have their type
set to be a pointer to the last class seen adding the protocol.
That is, if, while compiling the implementation for class A, but the
interface for class B is comes after the interface for class A, and both
A and B add protocol P, then all methods in protocol P will have self
pointing to B rather than A.
@protocol P
-method;
@end
@interface A <P>
@end
@interface B <P>
@end
@implementation A
-method {} // self is B, not A!
@end
Duplicate methods in an interface (especially across protocols and
between protocols and the interface) are both harmless and even to be
expected. They certainly should not cause the compiler to demand
duplicate method implementations :)
If the last command in the buffer had no parameters, its length would be
only 2 and thus processing would stop before reading the command from
the buffer.
This is one step closer to implementing conformsToProtocol. However,
protocols are not yet initialized correctly: they are not registered,
nor are their selectors.
While the static initializer list pointer was not written previously,
the module struct always came immediately after the symbols struct, and
the module version has so far always been 0. Thus, the list pointer is
correctly 0 for older progs and there's no need for a version bump.
This is actually a double issue: when a class implementing a protocol
used the protocol in @protocol(), not only would the protocol get
emitted as part of the class data specifying that the class conforms to
the protocol, a second instance would be emitted again when @protocol()
was used. On top of that, only the instance referenced by @protocol()
would be initialized. Now, both class emission and @protocol() get their
protocol def from the same place and thus only one, properly
initialized, protocol instance is emitted.
The problem was an erroneous assumption that the methods had to be
defined. Any class implementing a protocol must implement (and thus
define) the methods, but a protocol declaration cannot: it merely
declares the methods, and it's entirely possible for a module to see
only the protocol definition and not any classes implementing the
protocol.
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).
