class Storage
{
@Operator Int get(Int key) { return 0 }
@Operator Void set(Int key, Int val) { }
Void main()
{
this[10]++
}
}
The code above compiles but fails at runtime on attempt to load class with
java.lang.VerifyError: (class: fan/test_0/Storage, method: main signature: ()V)
Expecting to find long on stack
Because compiler doesn't expect second parameter of set to be primitive. Similar error happens if nullability of key in set and get don't match, because we can't just Dup argument in that case.
brianFri 26 Nov 2010
Promoted to ticket #1331 and assigned to brian
I will take a look, but no promises I will actually support it (vs just make it a compile time error), that is some of the ugliest code in the compiler.
brianThu 2 Jun 2011
Renamed from read-write access through overloaded operators to Fix set assignment to work with value types
brianThu 2 Jun 2011
Ticket resolved in 1.0.59
Fixed the compiler to correctly look at set value parameter to determine if boxing is required.
vkuzkokov Fri 26 Nov 2010
class Storage { @Operator Int get(Int key) { return 0 } @Operator Void set(Int key, Int val) { } Void main() { this[10]++ } }The code above compiles but fails at runtime on attempt to load class with
Because compiler doesn't expect second parameter of
setto be primitive. Similar error happens if nullability ofkeyinsetandgetdon't match, because we can't justDupargument in that case.brian Fri 26 Nov 2010
Promoted to ticket #1331 and assigned to brian
I will take a look, but no promises I will actually support it (vs just make it a compile time error), that is some of the ugliest code in the compiler.
brian Thu 2 Jun 2011
Renamed from read-write access through overloaded operators to Fix set assignment to work with value types
brian Thu 2 Jun 2011
Ticket resolved in 1.0.59
Fixed the compiler to correctly look at set value parameter to determine if boxing is required.