Thanks for picking this up into the backlog. I am not blocked if I don't have them, I was just curious. I am quite intrigued with the idea of reyfing the runtime semantics, this opens a whole lot of opportunities for tools based on dynamic data.
On Nov 19, 2018 17:40, Marcus Denker <marcus.den...@inria.fr> wrote:
Hi,Thanks! I will check all of them… it might very well be that they are not implemented / there are bugs.I will add them to the bug list.(the problem is that each of them takes effort… write test, stare at byte-code… so it will take some time)On 19 Nov 2018, at 09:30, Manuel Leuenberger <leuenberger@inf.unibe.ch> wrote:Hi,I am currently playing with MetaLinks in Pharo 7 and stumbled upon some issues. For example, I found that instrumenting message sends may break compilation (see https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/22681/Metalink-on-message-may-break-compilation). Two other issues also arised:i) How do I reify the value of an RB(Valuel|Literal|LiteralValue)Node? RFValueReification does not work, and there is no reification for literal, value, or literal value nodes.ii) How do I reify arguments and results of blocks? I tried reify context for the block body #before and value for #after block "last", but I often run into the problem of no reification for literals.iii) How are cascaded message sends reified? Am I supposed to instrument the cascade node or the individual message sends?I am grateful for any pointers towards a solution. BTW, Marcus' lecture slides give a great intro to metalinks (http://marcusdenker.de/talks/18LectureMetaLinks/MetaLinks.pdf).Cheers,Manuel
