Smalltalk › Squeak › Squeak - Dev

CompiledMethod>>#valueWithReceiver:arguments:

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

3 messages Options

Tim Johnson-2

CompiledMethod>>#valueWithReceiver:arguments:

Hi all,

Browsing through a 5.1+ image today, I noticed that CompiledMethod>>#valueWithReceiver:arguments: reads as follows. Does this method indeed need to be changed?

valueWithReceiver: aReceiver arguments: anArray

   "This should be changed after the release of Squeak 4.3 to
       ^self class receiver: aReceiver withArguments: anArray executeMethod: self"
   ^ aReceiver withArgs: anArray executeMethod: self

Thanks,
Tim

Tobias Pape

Re: CompiledMethod>>#valueWithReceiver:arguments:

> On 19.03.2018, at 07:33, Tim Johnson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Browsing through a 5.1+ image today, I noticed that CompiledMethod>>#valueWithReceiver:arguments: reads as follows. Does this method indeed need to be changed?
>
> valueWithReceiver: aReceiver arguments: anArray
>
> "This should be changed after the release of Squeak 4.3 to
> ^self class receiver: aReceiver withArguments: anArray executeMethod: self"
> ^ aReceiver withArgs: anArray executeMethod: self

There are some places like that.
Maybe we really should tackle them already :D

best regards
-Tobias

Eliot Miranda-2

Re: CompiledMethod>>#valueWithReceiver:arguments:

In reply to this post by Tim Johnson-2

Hi Tim,

On Mar 18, 2018, at 11:33 PM, Tim Johnson <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi all,

Browsing through a 5.1+ image today, I noticed that CompiledMethod>>#valueWithReceiver:arguments: reads as follows. Does this method indeed need to be changed?

valueWithReceiver: aReceiver arguments: anArray

   "This should be changed after the release of Squeak 4.3 to
       ^self class receiver: aReceiver withArguments: anArray executeMethod: self"
   ^ aReceiver withArgs: anArray executeMethod: self

If the system is to be used with exotic proxies (and it is) then yes, ish :-). I think the VM changes are in place. But the receiver:withArguments:executeMethod: method could be on the instance side. So please /don't/ put it on the class side. The class send is pointless.

IMO it would be better to put the primitive in valueWithReceiver:arguments: itself, but presumably the authors thought it easier to avoid the stack shuffling required to remove the compiled method (something I find dubious; perform:withArguments: has to do more). But that would require a new numbered primitive.

Thanks,
Tim