Meanwhile, in the DWScript SVN…

February 2nd, 2012

This summary of recent DWS changes is coming a bit late, and there is quite a bit to cover. Here is a quick, partial roundup of what changed since the last update.

Language changes:

  • Initial support for overloads (currently limited to standalone functions/procedures).
  • New operator “sar” for bitwise shift arithmetic right.
  • Delphi-like “dotted unit names” are now supported.
  • Support for classic Delphi-style local procedures declaration in units (before the “begin”).
  • Support const “blocks” in units.
  • Support for “array [TEnumeratedType] of” short declaration for static arrays.
  • New hints for unused private symbols and redundant scope specifiers.
  • New built-in functions: LastDelimiter, dynamic array’s Insert(), Min()/Max() overloads.

Library and script engine changes:

  • TContextMap & TSymbolDictionary were renamed to TdwsSourceContextMap & TdwsSymbolDictionary.
  • The context map content has been significantly reorganized, fixed and is now more detailed.
  • TdwsSuggestions can now optionally suggest keywords too.
  • Random functions now based on XorShift, with independent random per execution.
  • New demo/sample: simple web server based on Indy with multi-threaded server-side script execution.
  • Faster DWS SynEdit highlighter.
  • Improved documentation.
  • Various minor fixes and improvements.

JavaScript & CodeGen changes:

  • Closures are now supported by the JavaScript CodeGen.
  • Added Smart-Linking capabilities to the CodeGen when program is compiled with context map & symbol dictionary. Its capabilities and limitations are currently roughly similar to Delphi’s.
  • Improved JavaScript CodeGen for various code generation cases (faster and smaller, as measured through jsperf benchmarking on various browser engines).
  • Improved JavaScript obfuscator.
  • Improved JavaScript minifier.

Eric News

What do you think of function overloads?

January 26th, 2012

In Delphi, you can overload functions, but doing so requires using the overload directive explicitly, f.i. the following code declares two functions with the same name, one that will be invoked if you pass an integer, another that will be invoked you pass a string:

function MyFunc(a : Integer) : String; overload;
function MyFunc(s : String) : String; overload;

In many other languages, the overload directive is implicit, you don’t have to type it and you can always overload. On the other hand, it means that as long as your parameters differ, you can end up overloading an existing function without noticing, which can lead to confusion.

What do you think of function overloads?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Eric Ideas ,

Closures in DWScript / OP4JS

January 21st, 2012

Closures, also known as “anonymous methods” in Delphi, are now supported by DWScript for the JavaScript CodeGen, with the same syntax as in Delphi:

myObject.MyEvent := procedure (Sender : TObject);
                    begin
                       ...
                    end;

There are of course some extensions that go beyond what Delphi supports ;-)

You are allowed to use a named local procedure as a closure / anonymous method, with optional capture of local variables, allowing for neater layout of code, for instance:

begin
   ...
   procedure MyLocalProc(Sender : TObject);
   begin
      ...
   end;
   ...
   myObject.MyEvent := MyLocalProc;
   ...
end;

The function pointers and closures are unified, you did not have to distinguish between a “procedure” and a “procedure of object“, and you don’t have to distinguish a “reference to procedure” either, ie. if you declare

type TNotifyEvent = procedure (Sender : TObject);

as long as the parameters match (and result type for a function) , the above type will accept standalone functions, object methods, interface methods, and now closures/anonymous methods (and even record methods, which are just syntax sugar for standalone function with an implicit parameter).

PS: DWScript (as a scripting engine), will very likely evolve (in time) from a stack based-engine to a closure-based engine, so the above syntax will be supported for scripting purposes too, and not just when compiling to JavaScript.

Eric News , ,

SOPA blackout day

January 18th, 2012

Great SOPA blackout page from Wikipedia, being one the top worldwide site, this should generate more awareness than any other!

Wikipedia's SOPA blackout page

I usually avoid posting non-technical stuff, let SOPA be the exception that confirms the rule! As for a description of the problems of SOPA, see:

Eric News

Good Practices for JavaScript “asm” sections in DWS/OP4JS

January 16th, 2012

The compiler supports writing “asm” aka JavaScript section in the middle of Object Pascal, there are a few good practices as well as tips to keep in mind, let’s review the menu:

  1. Name conflicts and obfuscation support
  2. Do you really need an “asm” section?
  3. Don’t rely on implicit parameters structure
  4. Handling callbacks with “Variant” methods
  5. Handling callbacks in an “asm” section
  6. Current limitations

1. Name conflicts and obfuscation support

This should be a point zero actually, but the first thing to have in mind is that you are allowed in Pascal to use as names identifiers that are reserved in JavaScript. Those can be language keywords (“this”, “delete”, etc.) or common DOM objects and properties (“document”, “window”).

The compiler automatically protects you from such conflicts by transparently renaming your identifiers (currently by adding a “$”+number at the end).

Then there is the obfuscator, which will basically rename everything to short, meaningless names. That’s good for more than obfuscation: it reduces the size of the JavaScript, improves the parsing and lookup-based performance in the browser.

The consequence is that in an “asm” section, you should prefix all Pascal identifiers with an ‘@’, so the compiler can correctly compile your asm. For instance in:

var window : String;
...
asm
   @window = window.name
end;

The ‘@window’ refers to the ‘window’ string variable (which the compiler will rename), while ‘window.name’ will be compiled “as is”, as it reads the ‘name’ property of the global ‘window’ JavaScript object.

2. Do you really need an “asm”‘ section?

Though for some weird cases you might (like this gem), there are many cases in which you don’t need “asm”, as the language supports a “Variant” type which is a raw JavaScript object, and upon which you can call methods, read properties directly or via indexes.

For instance, with v a Variant, the following code:

v := v.getNext();
v['hello'] := v.space + 'world';

will get compiled (almost) straight into

v = v.getNext();
v['hello'] = v.space + 'world';

When using Variant, you don’t have strong compile-time checks (it’s just you vs JavaScript), property and function names are case-sensitive, so use them with care. This is similar in syntax and essence to using OLE Variants and Delphi.

On the other hand, you have compiler support, and you get automatic casts when assigning a variant to a strong type (Integer, String, etc.), and you also get name conflict protection & obfuscation support without having to ‘@’ your Pascal references.

3. Don’t rely on implicit parameters structure

Because they may change in future compiler revisions!

For instance, methods are currently invoked with an implicit “Self” parameters, and the others behind, so currently “arguments[0]” is Self, and everything else if after that. But don’t rely on it.

Future compiler revisions may change that parameter’s name, may obfuscate it, may remove it entirely in favor of an implicit “this”, may inline your function, etc.

So if you need explicit parameters, declare them, if you’re in a method and need to access the object (Self), use “@Self”, if you need to access a field of the current object use “@Self.FieldName”, etc. That will keep working.

4. Avoid declaring variables in “asm” sections

Declare them in the parent function/method instead, and reference them with the ‘@’ prefix.

There are three main reasons for that, the first is that doing so means they’ll be case-insensitive, the second is that it will allow the obfuscator to obfuscate them reason for that, and the third is that you’ll get compiler warnings if you declare a variable but do not use it (or if you forgot to @-prefix it).

So don’t write that:

asm
   var myTemp;
   myTemp = ...whatever...;
   ...
end;

But write this instead:

var myTemp : Variant;
...
asm
   @myTemp = ...whatever...;
   ...
end;

5. Handling callbacks with “Variant” methods

A common occurrence is to register a callback to a JavaScript object, when that object is hosted in a Variant, that’s fairly simple to achieve:

procedure DoImageLoaded;
begin
   ...
end;
...
var myImage : Variant; // will refer to an image object
...
myImage.onload(@DoImageLoaded);

There we use the ‘@’ operator Pascal-side, to make it explicit that we want a function pointer, and not call the function. The ‘@’ isn’t necessary when the function is declared Pascal-side, as the compiler can figure it out, but when invoking a Variant method, it doesn’t know the parameters type.

Note that since function pointers are unified, you can get a function pointer from an object method or an interface method in the same fashion:

myImage.onload(@myObject.DoImageLoaded);
myImage.onload(@myInterface.DoImageLoaded);

6. Handling callbacks in an “asm” section

If you want to register the callback in an “asm” section, the situation is a little more complex, as “@myObject.myMethod” will refer to the function prototype, outside of its context. It means it’s okay for standalone functions or procedures, but may not do what you’re expecting for object or interface methods.

The solution is to acquire the function pointer outside of the “asm” section:

var myCallback : Variant;
...
myCallback := @myObject.DoImageLoaded;
asm
   @myImage.onload(@myCallback);
end;

7. Current limitations

Currently the parser for “asm” sections doesn’t really understand JavaScript:

  • it’s still treating JS as a weird invalid form of Pascal, and notably {} define comments for it, so it will pass whatever is inside curlies “as is”, and will annoyingly ignore @ signs inside curlies
  • some weird operator combos (but valid JS)  may throw off the parser, if that happens, place that code in between curlies, and post a bug report

Hopefully in time, there will be a proper JS parser, but currently the focus is more on the Pascal side, and “asm” sections are intended for handling corner cases more than as a main workhorse.

Eric Tips , , ,