General¶

We found usual syntax in code where the keyword for was included as a qualifier to the def input parameter... statement, which cause an Expression execution error.

20191231 Update: Fixed in 4207a Revisions 11346-11347
Update: Being worked by GES

P2J Branch¶

This is being handled in Branch 4207a

Testcase¶

Checked into testcase_repo:
uast/table-handle_parameters/tablehandle_parameter_with_for.p

procedure input_parameter_with_for:
   // Use these 2 lines to demonstrate the behavior of the "for" being handled.
   // Note that order matters. If you reverse the "define variable" and "define input parameter" 
   // lines, it will result in the below error:
   // ** Unknown Field or Variable name - gh. (201)
   // Only unsubscripted INPUT HANDLE program variables allowed in TABLE-HANDLE FOR phrase. (9080)   
   define variable gh as handle no-undo.
   define input parameter table-handle for gh.

   // Use the below line to demonstrate typical behavior (without the "for")                                                                                                
   //define input parameter table-handle gh.                                                                                                                                
   message gh:name.                                                                                                                                                         
end procedure.                                                                                                                                                              

define variable tt as handle no-undo.                                                                                                                                       
create temp-table tt.                                                                                                                                                       
define variable tth as handle no-undo.                                                                                                                                      
tt:add-new-field("num","integer").                                                                                                                                          
tt:temp-table-prepare("ordx").                                                                                                                                              
tth = tt:handle.                                                                                                                                                            
run input_parameter_with_for (table-handle tth).

Artifacts¶

Execution Log¶

     [java] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     [java] Core Code Conversion
     [java] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     [java] 
     [java] Optional rule set [customer_specific_conversion] not found.
     [java] ./abl/tablehandle_parameter_with_for.p
     [java] EXPRESSION EXECUTION ERROR:
     [java] ---------------------------
     [java] ref = this.getImmediateChild(prog.kw_tab_hand, null).getImmediateChild(prog.expression, null).getImmediateChild(prog.var_handle, null)
     [java]                                                                                               ^  { java.lang.NullPointerException }
     [java] ---------------------------
     [java] Elapsed job time:  00:00:00.759
     [java] ERROR:
     [java] com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.TreeWalkException: ERROR!  Active Rule:
     [java] -----------------------
     [java]       RULE REPORT      
     [java] -----------------------
     [java] Rule Type :   WALK
     [java] Source AST:  [ define ] BLOCK/PROCEDURE/BLOCK/STATEMENT/DEFINE_PARAMETER/ @5:4 {17179869212}
     [java] Copy AST  :  [ define ] BLOCK/PROCEDURE/BLOCK/STATEMENT/DEFINE_PARAMETER/ @5:4 {17179869212}
     [java] Condition :  ref = this.getImmediateChild(prog.kw_tab_hand, null).getImmediateChild(prog.expression, null).getImmediateChild(prog.var_handle, null)
     [java] Loop      :  false
     [java] --- END RULE REPORT ---
     [java] 
     [java] 
     [java] 
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.PatternEngine.run(PatternEngine.java:1070)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.convert.TransformDriver.processTrees(TransformDriver.java:542)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.convert.ConversionDriver.back(ConversionDriver.java:580)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.convert.TransformDriver.executeJob(TransformDriver.java:876)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.convert.ConversionDriver.main(ConversionDriver.java:983)
     [java] Caused by: com.goldencode.expr.ExpressionException: Expression execution error @1:95 [DEFINE_PARAMETER id=17179869212]
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.AstWalker.walk(AstWalker.java:275)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.AstWalker.walk(AstWalker.java:210)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.PatternEngine.apply(PatternEngine.java:1633)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.PatternEngine.processAst(PatternEngine.java:1531)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.PatternEngine.processAst(PatternEngine.java:1479)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.PatternEngine.run(PatternEngine.java:1034)
     [java]     ... 4 more
     [java] Caused by: com.goldencode.expr.ExpressionException: Expression execution error @1:95
     [java]     at com.goldencode.expr.Expression.execute(Expression.java:484)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.Rule.apply(Rule.java:497)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.Rule.executeActions(Rule.java:745)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.Rule.coreProcessing(Rule.java:712)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.Rule.apply(Rule.java:534)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.Rule.executeActions(Rule.java:745)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.Rule.coreProcessing(Rule.java:712)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.Rule.apply(Rule.java:534)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.RuleContainer.apply(RuleContainer.java:585)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.RuleSet.apply(RuleSet.java:98)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.RuleContainer.apply(RuleContainer.java:585)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.RuleSet.apply(RuleSet.java:98)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.AstWalker.walk(AstWalker.java:262)
     [java]     ... 9 more
     [java] Caused by: java.lang.NullPointerException
     [java]     at com.goldencode.expr.CE9850.execute(Unknown Source)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.expr.Expression.execute(Expression.java:391)
     [java]     ... 21 more

BUILD FAILED

AST Snippet¶

        <ast col="0" id="17179869211" line="0" text="statement" type="STATEMENT">
          <ast col="4" id="17179869212" line="5" text="define" type="DEFINE_PARAMETER">
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.String" key="name" value="gh"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="type" value="380"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="parmtype" value="691"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.Boolean" key="vardef" value="true"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="support_level" value="16400"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.String" key="javaname" value="gh_1"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.String" key="classname" value="handle"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="procrefid" value="17179869186"/>
            <ast col="11" id="17179869214" line="5" text="input" type="KW_INPUT"/>
            <ast col="27" id="17179869218" line="5" text="table-handle" type="KW_TAB_HAND">
              <ast col="40" id="17179869220" line="5" text="for" type="KW_FOR"/>
              <ast col="44" id="17179869222" line="5" text="gh" type="SYMBOL"/>
            </ast>
          </ast>
        </ast>

The solution is to add code in annotations that will detect this case. When found, it should:

• delete the FOR keyword and fixup the tree as if it was never there
• delete the extra handle variable

If I understand correctly, the code will naturally convert after that.

Note that reversing the lines in the testcase alters the behavior in Progress.

   define variable gh as handle no-undo.
   define input parameter table-handle for gh.

works fine. But reversing the lines:

   define input parameter table-handle for gh.
   define variable gh as handle no-undo.

results in:

** Unknown Field or Variable name - gh. (201)
Only unsubscripted INPUT HANDLE program variables allowed in TABLE-HANDLE FOR phrase. (9080)

This fix enables the TABLE-HANDLE FOR <existing_handle_var> use case. We already have support in conversion (to see it, search on is_table_handle_for) but it did not work. This was due to the fact that in progress.g we only matched a SYMBOL and not a possible expr. This extra matching is only in the case where the FOR is present (undocumented 4GL feature).

Converted code fails to compile

compile:
    [javac] Compiling 36 source files to /home/rfb/projects/VirtualBox-VMs/shared/projects/testcases/uast/uast/buildarea/build/classes
    [javac] /home/rfb/projects/VirtualBox-VMs/shared/projects/testcases/uast/uast/buildarea/src/com/goldencode/testcases/abl/TablehandleParameterWithFor.java:38: error: annotation @LegacyParameter is missing a default value for the element 'type'
    [javac]       @LegacyParameter(mode = "INPUT")
    [javac]       ^
    [javac] /home/rfb/projects/VirtualBox-VMs/shared/projects/testcases/uast/uast/buildarea/src/com/goldencode/testcases/abl/TablehandleParameterWithFor.java:45: error: cannot find symbol
    [javac]       handle gh = new handle(_gh.getTableHandle());
    [javac]                              ^
    [javac]   symbol:   variable _gh
    [javac]   location: class TablehandleParameterWithFor
    [javac] /home/rfb/projects/VirtualBox-VMs/shared/projects/testcases/uast/uast/buildarea/src/com/goldencode/testcases/abl/TablehandleParameterWithFor.java:49: error: cannot find symbol
    [javac]          TemporaryBuffer.createDynamicTable(_gh, gh, true, false);
    [javac]                                             ^
    [javac]   symbol:   variable _gh
    [javac]   location: class TablehandleParameterWithFor
    [javac] 3 errors

Roger, take these files from 3809e:

rules/annotations/collect_names.rules
rules/convert/method_definitions.rules

They are built from trunk, so is safe to apply.

Constantin Asofiei wrote:

Roger, take these files from 3809e:
[...]

They are built from trunk, so is safe to apply.

Same errors occurred after applying those files. What were you expecting to be fixed?

I notice that _null is passed in as the parameter, hinting that the emitter didn't know what the parameter was.

   @LegacySignature(type = Type.PROCEDURE, name = "input_parameter_with_for", parameters = 
   {
      @LegacyParameter(mode = "INPUT")
   })
   /**
    * Use these 2 lines to demonstrate the behavior of the "for" being handled.
    */
   public void inputParameterWithFor(final TableParameter _null)
   {
      handle gh = new handle(_gh.getTableHandle());

      internalProcedure(new Block((Body) () -> 
      {
         TemporaryBuffer.createDynamicTable(_gh, gh, true, false);
         message(gh.unwrap().name());
      }));      

      //  Use the below line to demonstrate typical behavior (without the "for")
      // define input parameter table-handle gh.

   }

They fix another issue, I thought it was related to this. So looks like there's another case to fix. Please post the AST for define input parameter table-handle for gh.

Constantin Asofiei wrote:

They fix another issue, I thought it was related to this. So looks like there's another case to fix. Please post the AST for define input parameter table-handle for gh.

        <ast col="0" id="210453397537" line="0" text="statement" type="STATEMENT">
          <ast col="4" id="210453397538" line="8" text="define" type="DEFINE_PARAMETER">
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="support_level" value="16400"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="procrefid" value="210453397506"/>
            <ast col="11" id="210453397540" line="8" text="input" type="KW_INPUT"/>
            <ast col="27" id="210453397544" line="8" text="table-handle" type="KW_TAB_HAND">
              <ast col="40" id="210453397546" line="8" text="for" type="KW_FOR"/>
              <ast col="0" id="210453397548" line="0" text="expression" type="EXPRESSION">
                <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="support_level" value="16400"/>
                <ast col="44" id="210453397549" line="8" text="gh" type="VAR_HANDLE">
                  <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="oldtype" value="2782"/>
                  <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="refid" value="210453397524"/>
                  <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="support_level" value="16400"/>
                </ast>
              </ast>
            </ast>
          </ast>
        </ast>

Roger Borrello wrote:

Constantin Asofiei wrote:

They fix another issue, I thought it was related to this. So looks like there's another case to fix. Please post the AST for define input parameter table-handle for gh.

[...]

Note that in this testcase, the gh is used in both a define variable and define input parameter table-handle for gh:

   define variable gh as handle no-undo.
   define input parameter table-handle for gh.

Roger Borrello wrote:

Note that in this testcase, the gh is used in both a define variable and define input parameter table-handle for gh:

Is it the same 'pointer'? If you change one, does the other change too, in the same program?

Constantin Asofiei wrote:

Roger Borrello wrote:

Note that in this testcase, the gh is used in both a define variable and define input parameter table-handle for gh:

Is it the same 'pointer'? If you change one, does the other change too, in the same program?

Those 2 lines can be replaced with define input parameter table-handle gh. and you will get proper behavior. Does that help?

Roger Borrello wrote:

Those 2 lines can be replaced with define input parameter table-handle gh. and you will get proper behavior. Does that help?

Yes, it should. Please post the AST and the LegacySignature annotation.

Constantin Asofiei wrote:

Roger Borrello wrote:

Those 2 lines can be replaced with define input parameter table-handle gh. and you will get proper behavior. Does that help?

Yes, it should. Please post the AST and the LegacySignature annotation.

        <ast col="0" id="210453397529" line="0" text="statement" type="STATEMENT">
          <ast col="4" id="210453397530" line="11" text="define" type="DEFINE_PARAMETER">
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.String" key="name" value="gh"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="type" value="380"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="parmtype" value="691"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.Boolean" key="vardef" value="true"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="support_level" value="16400"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.String" key="javaname" value="gh"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.String" key="classname" value="handle"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="procrefid" value="210453397506"/>
            <ast col="11" id="210453397532" line="11" text="input" type="KW_INPUT"/>
            <ast col="27" id="210453397536" line="11" text="table-handle" type="KW_TAB_HAND">
              <ast col="40" id="210453397538" line="11" text="gh" type="SYMBOL"/>
            </ast>
          </ast>
        </ast>

   @LegacySignature(type = Type.PROCEDURE, name = "input_parameter_with_for", parameters = 
   {
      @LegacyParameter(name = "gh", type = "HANDLE", mode = "INPUT")
   })
   /**
    * Use these 2 lines to demonstrate the behavior of the "for" being handled.
    */
   public void inputParameterWithFor(final TableParameter _gh)
   {
      handle gh = new handle();

      internalProcedure(new Block((Body) () -> 
      {
         TemporaryBuffer.createDynamicTable(_gh, gh, true, false);
         message(gh.unwrap().name());
      }));
   }

Roger, there is no vardef annotation in the case in #4424-13 (the AST is from the full conversion, right?) Add -Drules.tracing=true to your conversion script and check a vardef-by-rule, to find who sets this annotation.

Constantin Asofiei wrote:

Roger, there is no vardef annotation in the case in #4424-13 (the AST is from the full conversion, right?) Add -Drules.tracing=true to your conversion script and check a vardef-by-rule, to find who sets this annotation.

This didn't work: java -classpath p2j/build/lib/p2j.jar com.goldencode.p2j.convert.ConversionDriver -Drules.tracing=true f2+m0+cb ./table-handle_parameters/tablehandle_parameter_with_for.p

Is there a -D debug level I should use, or does rule.tracing=true go someplace else?

Roger Borrello wrote:

... or does rule.tracing=true go someplace else?

Before the main class, like this:
java -Drules.tracing=true -classpath p2j/build/lib/p2j.jar com.goldencode.p2j.convert.ConversionDriver f2+m0+cb ./table-handle_parameters/tablehandle_parameter_with_for.p

Constantin Asofiei wrote:

Roger Borrello wrote:

... or does rule.tracing=true go someplace else?

Before the main class, like this:
java -Drules.tracing=true -classpath p2j/build/lib/p2j.jar com.goldencode.p2j.convert.ConversionDriver f2+m0+cb ./table-handle_parameters/tablehandle_parameter_with_for.p

Thank you for that hint, I'll be using it!

Here's what's in the parameter section for the good version:

          <ast col="4" id="468151435290" line="11" text="define" type="DEFINE_PARAMETER">
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.String" key="name" value="gh"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="type" value="380"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="parmtype" value="691"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.Boolean" key="vardef" value="true"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.String" key="vardef-byrule" value="fixups/post_parse_fixups.xml:412"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="support_level" value="16400"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.String" key="support_level-byrule" value="gaps/gap_analysis_marking.xml:430"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.String" key="javaname" value="gh"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.String" key="javaname-byrule" value="annotations/variable_definitions.rules:191"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.String" key="classname" value="handle"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.String" key="classname-byrule" value="annotations/variable_definitions.rules:332"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="procrefid" value="468151435266"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.String" key="procrefid-byrule" value="annotations/procedures.rules:181"/>
            <ast col="11" id="468151435292" line="11" text="input" type="KW_INPUT"/>
            <ast col="27" id="468151435296" line="11" text="table-handle" type="KW_TAB_HAND">
              <ast col="40" id="468151435298" line="11" text="gh" type="SYMBOL"/>
            </ast>
          </ast>

And here what there for the bad version:

          <ast col="4" id="468151435298" line="8" text="define" type="DEFINE_PARAMETER">
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="support_level" value="16400"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.String" key="support_level-byrule" value="gaps/gap_analysis_marking.xml:430"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="procrefid" value="468151435266"/>
            <annotation datatype="java.lang.String" key="procrefid-byrule" value="annotations/procedures.rules:181"/>
            <ast col="11" id="468151435300" line="8" text="input" type="KW_INPUT"/>
            <ast col="27" id="468151435304" line="8" text="table-handle" type="KW_TAB_HAND">
              <ast col="40" id="468151435306" line="8" text="for" type="KW_FOR"/>
              <ast col="0" id="468151435308" line="0" text="expression" type="EXPRESSION">
                <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="support_level" value="16400"/>
                <annotation datatype="java.lang.String" key="support_level-byrule" value="gaps/gap_analysis_marking.xml:430"/>
                <ast col="44" id="468151435309" line="8" text="gh" type="VAR_HANDLE">
                  <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="oldtype" value="2782"/>
                  <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="refid" value="468151435284"/>
                  <annotation datatype="java.lang.String" key="refid-byrule" value="fixups/post_parse_fixups.xml:480"/>
                  <annotation datatype="java.lang.Long" key="support_level" value="16400"/>
                  <annotation datatype="java.lang.String" key="support_level-byrule" value="gaps/gap_analysis_marking.xml:430"/>
                </ast>
              </ast>
            </ast>
          </ast>

Roger Borrello wrote:

Here's what's in the parameter section for the good version:

The vardef annotation is set by fixups/post_parse_fixups.xml:412; this checks for a tempidx annotation (after parsing) - I think you are missing this annotation, so this is a parser problem. Check the ASTs with the good and bad versions, only after the parse (without post_parse_fixups) - I don't know how to block FWD to not execute post_parse_fixups@, I usually attach the debugger (or run from Eclipse), breakpoint right after parsing has finished, and kill the process.

Constantin Asofiei wrote:

Roger Borrello wrote:

Here's what's in the parameter section for the good version:

The vardef annotation is set by fixups/post_parse_fixups.xml:412; this checks for a tempidx annotation (after parsing) - I think you are missing this annotation, so this is a parser problem. Check the ASTs with the good and bad versions, only after the parse (without post_parse_fixups) - I don't know how to block FWD to not execute post_parse_fixups@, I usually attach the debugger (or run from Eclipse), breakpoint right after parsing has finished, and kill the process.

I am trying to dig into #4427 at the same time. Are you able grab 4207a to help? It would be greatly appreciated.

Roger Borrello wrote:

I am trying to dig into #4427 at the same time. Are you able grab 4207a to help? It would be greatly appreciated.

Sorry, I was debugging another issue and I need to sign of for today. I'll look tomorrow, if you don't get to it today.

I've been trying to understand how TABLE-HANDLE and TABLE-HANDLE FOR behave - looks like they are not equivalent. The FOR option links the local var to the parameter (as a 'pointer') - if you change the parameter, the variable is changed, too. There may be more differences.

Stanislav, I see that you've added testcases related to PARAMETER TABLE-HANDLE [FOR] (like th-for-regular.p). Was this supposed to be working in FWD at some point?

Sorry, I don't remember anything about that.

Greg, I've fixed this in the conversion rules (it was not a parser problem in the end). But before checking what it works in 4GL, I added also DATASET-HANDLE FOR and DATASET/TABLE-HANDLE FOR in functions (because it made sense, to be symmetric...) - this is not supported by 4GL, should I remove these?

Anyway, the changes are in 4207a rev 11346. Greg, please review.

Constantin Asofiei wrote:

Anyway, the changes are in 4207a rev 11346. Greg, please review.

Sorry for the lack of response. Today was Thanksgiving in the US. The customer code used this unorthodox method to specify a buffer handle as an input parameter.

You have to be careful to work your 3809e changes into these changes. I see some conflicts with your H022 updates.

Roger Borrello wrote:

Sorry for the lack of response. Today was Thanksgiving in the US.

Happy Thanksgiving! :)

You have to be careful to work your 3809e changes into these changes. I see some conflicts with your H022 updates.

The changes are built on top of 4207a, not 3809e. If we need other changes from 3809e, we will pull it from there (i.e. the files from #4424-10, if they will be needed at some point).

Constantin Asofiei wrote:

Roger Borrello wrote:

Sorry for the lack of response. Today was Thanksgiving in the US.

Happy Thanksgiving! :)

You have to be careful to work your 3809e changes into these changes. I see some conflicts with your H022 updates.

The changes are built on top of 4207a, not 3809e. If we need other changes from 3809e, we will pull it from there (i.e. the files from #4424-10, if they will be needed at some point).

No problem. I just wanted to raise awareness that there are a couple of threads containing some of those files.

I am OOO today, as well, but wanted to take a quick look at this update. I did a full build, and came across another issue and have added a new testcase: uast/table-handle_parameters/tablehandle_parameter_with_table.p

This is another procedure with an input parameter that is a TABLE instead of TABLE-HANDLE. The result is:

     [java] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     [java] Code Conversion Annotations
     [java] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     [java] 
     [java] Optional rule set [customer_specific_annotations_prep] not found.
     [java] ./abl/tablehandle_parameter_with_table.p
     [java] Elapsed job time:  00:00:01.362
     [java] EXPRESSION EXECUTION ERROR:
     [java] ---------------------------
     [java] throwException("Missing 'refid' annotation")
     [java] ^  { Missing 'refid' annotation [DEFINE_PARAMETER id <244813135899> 4:4] }
     [java] ---------------------------
     [java] EXPRESSION EXECUTION ERROR:
     [java] ---------------------------
     [java] currlist.add(execLib("get_classname", copy))
     [java]              ^  { Expression execution error @1:1 }
     [java] ---------------------------
     [java] ERROR:
     [java] com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.TreeWalkException: ERROR!  Active Rule:
     [java] -----------------------
     [java]       RULE REPORT      
     [java] -----------------------
     [java] Rule Type :   WALK
     [java] Source AST:  [ define ] BLOCK/PROCEDURE/BLOCK/STATEMENT/DEFINE_PARAMETER/ @4:4 {244813135899}
     [java] Copy AST  :  [ define ] BLOCK/PROCEDURE/BLOCK/STATEMENT/DEFINE_PARAMETER/ @4:4 {244813135899}
     [java] Condition :  throwException("Missing 'refid' annotation")
     [java] Loop      :  false
     [java] --- END RULE REPORT ---
     [java] 
     [java] 
     [java] 
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.PatternEngine.run(PatternEngine.java:1070)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.convert.TransformDriver.processTrees(TransformDriver.java:542)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.convert.ConversionDriver.back(ConversionDriver.java:562)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.convert.TransformDriver.executeJob(TransformDriver.java:876)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.convert.ConversionDriver.main(ConversionDriver.java:983)
     [java] Caused by: com.goldencode.expr.ExpressionException: Expression execution error @1:14 [DEFINE_PARAMETER id=244813135899]
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.AstWalker.walk(AstWalker.java:275)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.AstWalker.walk(AstWalker.java:210)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.PatternEngine.apply(PatternEngine.java:1633)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.PatternEngine.processAst(PatternEngine.java:1531)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.PatternEngine.processAst(PatternEngine.java:1479)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.PatternEngine.run(PatternEngine.java:1034)
     [java]     ... 4 more
     [java] Caused by: com.goldencode.expr.ExpressionException: Expression execution error @1:14
     [java]     at com.goldencode.expr.Expression.execute(Expression.java:484)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.Rule.apply(Rule.java:497)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.Rule.executeActions(Rule.java:745)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.Rule.coreProcessing(Rule.java:712)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.Rule.apply(Rule.java:534)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.RuleContainer.apply(RuleContainer.java:585)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.RuleSet.apply(RuleSet.java:98)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.AstWalker.walk(AstWalker.java:262)
     [java]     ... 9 more
     [java] Caused by: com.goldencode.expr.ExpressionException: Expression execution error @1:1
     [java]     at com.goldencode.expr.Expression.execute(Expression.java:484)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.Rule.apply(Rule.java:497)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.Rule.executeActions(Rule.java:745)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.Rule.coreProcessing(Rule.java:712)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.Rule.apply(Rule.java:534)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.Rule.executeActions(Rule.java:745)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.Rule.coreProcessing(Rule.java:712)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.Rule.apply(Rule.java:534)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.NamedFunction.execute(NamedFunction.java:450)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.AstSymbolResolver.execute(AstSymbolResolver.java:712)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.CommonAstSupport$Library.execLib(CommonAstSupport.java:1534)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.expr.CE9131.execute(Unknown Source)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.expr.Expression.execute(Expression.java:391)
     [java]     ... 16 more
     [java] Caused by: com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.CommonAstSupport$UserGeneratedException: Missing 'refid' annotation [DEFINE_PARAMETER id <244813135899> 4:4]
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.CommonAstSupport$Library.throwException(CommonAstSupport.java:2817)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.p2j.pattern.CommonAstSupport$Library.throwException(CommonAstSupport.java:2802)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.expr.CE9134.execute(Unknown Source)
     [java]     at com.goldencode.expr.Expression.execute(Expression.java:391)
     [java]     ... 28 more

Roger Borrello wrote:

I am OOO today, as well, but wanted to take a quick look at this update. I did a full build, and came across another issue and have added a new testcase: uast/table-handle_parameters/tablehandle_parameter_with_table.p

This is another procedure with an input parameter that is a TABLE instead of TABLE-HANDLE. The result is:

Thanks, it looks like a regression from my changes. I'll take a look.

This is fixed in 11347. Please test again.

Code Review Task Branch 4207a Revisions 11346-11347

Overall, the changes look good.

One question: in scope_promotion, what is the idea behind removing the promotion of the handle var being referenced? It seems like that var may in fact need to be promoted.

Greg Shah wrote:

Code Review Task Branch 4207a Revisions 11346-11347

Overall, the changes look good.

One question: in scope_promotion, what is the idea behind removing the promotion of the handle var being referenced? It seems like that var may in fact need to be promoted.

That code was promoting the DEFINE PARAMETER - this must never happen, as it breaks recursivity. Also, that parmrefid annotation (at the referenced DEF VAR) was removed completely, I don't understand what it was trying to do - I think it was an early attempt at adding support for TABLE-HANDLE parameters.

OK, that works for me.

And another reason why parmrefid was also incorrect: a var can be referenced by multiple parameters, not just one.

Constantin Asofiei wrote:

This is fixed in 11347. Please test again.

Both testcases (tablehandle_parameter_with_for.p and tablehandle_parameter_with_table.p) convert and compile (as well as customer code).

Great job!

Task branch 4207a was merged to trunk as revision 11344.