[Mono-devel-list] [PATCH] Implementation for ReflectionOnlyLoad methods

[Paolo Molaro]

On 01/19/05 Carlos Alberto Cortez wrote:
> I think it is read to be commited (except, of course, by the fact that
> any style/code errors the jit guys could tell me).

I don't see any need to duplicate the hashtables that holds assemblies
for the metadata-only ones. Just use the same data structures as
the normal assemblies and tag metadata-only assemblies with a boolean or
bit in MonoImage. You'll need to check this flag in the current codepaths,
of course.

> +MonoAssembly*
> +mono_assembly_refonly_invoke_search_hook (MonoAssemblyName *aname)

Why is this public API needed?

> +void
> +mono_install_assembly_refonly_search_hook (MonoAssemblySearchFunc func, gpointer user_data)

Same.

> +void
> +mono_install_assembly_refonly_preload_hook (MonoAssemblyPreLoadFunc func, gpointer user_data)

Idem.

>  MonoAssembly*
> -mono_assembly_loaded (MonoAssemblyName *aname)
> +mono_assembly_load (MonoAssemblyName *aname, const char *basedir, MonoImageOpenStatus *status)
>  {
> +	return mono_assembly_load_refonly (aname, basedir, status, FALSE);
> +}
> +	
> +MonoAssembly*
> +mono_assembly_loaded (MonoAssemblyName *aname, gboolean ref_only)

You changed the public API here: this is not allowed.

> @@ -525,7 +533,11 @@
>  			if (t == null)
>  				return null;
>  
> -			return Activator.CreateInstance (t);
> +			try {
> +				return Activator.CreateInstance (t);
> +			} catch (InvalidOperationException e) {
> +				throw new ArgumentException ("It is illegal to invoke a method on a Type loaded via ReflectionOnly methods.");
> +			}

Please also add test cases to the test suite that test for this kind of change.

> Index: MonoMethod.cs
> ===================================================================
> --- MonoMethod.cs	(revisión: 39129)
> +++ MonoMethod.cs	(copia de trabajo)
> @@ -118,6 +118,8 @@
>  				throw new ArgumentException ("parameters");
>  			try {
>  				return InternalInvoke (obj, parameters);
> +			} catch (InvalidOperationException) {
> +				throw;

Test case needed here.

> Index: AppDomain.cs
> ===================================================================
> --- AppDomain.cs	(revisión: 39129)
> +++ AppDomain.cs	(copia de trabajo)
> @@ -64,6 +64,9 @@
>  		[ThreadStatic]
>  		static Hashtable assembly_resolve_in_progress;
>  
> +		[ThreadStatic]
> +		static Hashtable assembly_prebind_resolve_in_progress;
> +

I'm not sure a second hash table is needed here: you can always check the
RefOnly flag when doing a lookup, right?

Thanks.
lupus

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
lupus at debian.org                                     debian/rules
lupus at ximian.com                             Monkeys do it better