[M3devel] layout of objects?
Jay K
jay.krell at cornell.edu
Fri Mar 22 05:55:56 CET 2013
layout of objects?
How are Modula-3 objects layed out?
i.e. "OBJECT"/"METHODS"/"OVERRIDES"
I skimmed m3front and it wasn't obvious.
A common way for C++ "objects" to be layed out,
in the face of no RTTI and only single inheritance,
and virtual functions, is that a pointer to a record
of function pointers is first in the record.
Like this:
class Type
{
virtual void F1();
virtual void F2();
int data1;
int data2;
};
ends up lik more this:
struct TypeFunctions
{
void (*F1)(Type*);
void (*F2)(Type*);
};
struct Type
{
TypeFunctions* Functions; /* always first,
or at least a fixed offset, and located independent
of the size of the data; could also be at "-1" or such */.
int data1;
int data2;
};
Type* x;
x->F1();
=>
x->Functions->F1(x);
Functions added in more derived types go at the end.
Ditto for data.
In the absence of multiple-inheritance and RTTI, it is simple and predictable.
(RTTI makes only small modifications.)
Looking through m3front, it wasn't at all obvious if it works this way.
I would like to declare something in C (or possibly C++, but not likely),
such that I might actually recognize the various low level operations
and "uncompile" it back to a typeful/typesafe form, like the above C++
to C transform.
I can't likely uncompile to C++ with virtual functions,
because the actual layout in C++ is not guaranteed.
Granted, I am being lazy.
I should/could compile some small samples.
But I might not get the entire story that way.
Thanks,
- Jay
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://m3lists.elegosoft.com/pipermail/m3devel/attachments/20130322/d2cac3dc/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the M3devel
mailing list