On 17/12/14 01:26 PM, Soni L. wrote:
On 17/12/14 03:26 AM, Dirk Laurie wrote:
2014-12-17 4:54 GMT+02:00 Soni L. <fakedme@gmail.com>:
First of all I want to be able to _G:table.insert("something").
Secondly, I want to be able to _G:["print"]().
What exactly are these supposed to be syntax sugar for?
It's opcode sugar, actually.
_G:["print"](...) is already supported by the opcode, just use a
non-constant index. It basically translates to _G["print"](_G, ...)
(but _G only gets evaluated once).
_G:table.insert("something") is a bit trickier to implement. (it uses
more opcodes) But think about it like this: in the same way that
_G:print() translates to _G.print(_G), _G:table.insert("something")
translates to _G.table.insert(_G, "something"). (add `do local _ = _G
... end` boilerplate as needed)
And ofc, _G:["table"]["insert"]("something"), I guess you can guess
what this does.
Here's what I tried:
https://github.com/SoniEx2/sexlua/commit/b279aebc50b5
When I try _G:_G.print("test") I get
[soniex2@soniex-pc src]$ ./luac -l -l -o /dev/null -
_G:_G.print("test")
main <stdin:0,0> (5 instructions at 0x10800c0)
0+ params, 3 slots, 1 upvalue, 0 locals, 3 constants, 0 functions
1 [1] GETTABUP 0 0 -1 ; _ENV "_G"
2 [1] SELF 0 0 -1 ; "_G"
3 [1] LOADK 2 -3 ; "test"
4 [1] CALL 1 -131 1
5 [1] RETURN 0 1
constants (3) for 0x10800c0:
1 "_G"
2 "print"
3 "test"
locals (0) for 0x10800c0:
upvalues (1) for 0x10800c0:
0 _ENV 1 0
It's missing a GETTABLE (for the 2nd _G, with key "print" aka -2) and
that CALL should be... CALL 0 2 1? Completely broken.
And when I try _G:print("test") I get
[soniex2@soniex-pc src]$ ./luac -l -l -o /dev/null -
_G:print("test")
2 [1] SELF 0 0 -2 ; "print"
3 [1] LOADK 2 -3 ; "test"
4 [1] CALL 0 3 1
5 [1] RETURN 0 1
constants (3) for 0x1a0d0c0:
1 "_G"
2 "print"
3 "test"
locals (0) for 0x1a0d0c0:
upvalues (1) for 0x1a0d0c0:
0 _ENV 1 0
Which has wrong CALL. (0 2 1 in unmodified/vanilla Lua. I'm not sure
why this is happening.)
