[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: DO is not using method types from remote objects

From: Stefan Urbanek
Subject: Re: DO is not using method types from remote objects
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 11:52:19 +0200

On 2003-06-15 11:19:01 +0200 Richard Frith-Macdonald <address@hidden> wrote:

On Sunday, June 15, 2003, at 09:38  am, Stefan Urbanek wrote:


This is a bit larger problem with DO and selectors. Problem is that somewhere 
in gnustep DO wrong selector types are used. DO mechanism does not use selector 
types from remote object but from local runtime.


And here is the problem, because on the client side i have no type information 
in runtime. Should not the information from method signature be used instead of 
getting one from runtime?

Well, it might be classified as a base library, bug ... but any workaround 
within the base library would need changes to the objc runtime too, because the 
runtime will not pass the base library enough information (specifically the 
object being messaged) to determine the method types associated with the 

Within your code, it's likely to be easy to work around,  because you probably 
know what object the message is being sent to ... so you can use 
-methodSignatureForSelector: to get the type information, then register a typed 
version of the selector with the runtime.  Once you have done that, the DO 
system should use the typed version of the selector and it should all work.

Thanks for the suggestion, same was suggested few secods before you by alexm. 
I've put that workarouind in steptalk sources, if you are interested it is in 
Source/NSInvocation+additions.m:198 It seems to work for now.

So if it is considered a bug, should log it into savannah bug tracking? Or you 
will take care about that one?


p.s.: i've posted two more DO related bugreports (about NSConnection and 
NSObject/NSMethodSignature) to savannah. They were sent to me by email, but not 
to the bug-gnustep. Is there something wrong with automatic delivery? To: 
header in email looked like:

To: address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden,
       address@hidden, address@hidden


First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you 
- Mahatma Gandhi

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]