toComplex infinite recursion with recursive constraints?

[MetaChrome]

It would appear that toComplex falls into infinite recursion with the following patterns:

s:/_flash/shared_haxe/tinkerbell_h3/src/tink/macro/tools/TypeTools.hx:224: characters 63-91 : Called from s:/_flash/shared_haxe/tinkerbell_h3/src/tink/macro/tools/TypeTools.hx:203: characters 19-37 : Called from s:/_flash/shared_haxe/tinkerbell_h3/src/tink/macro/tools/TypeTools.hx:207: characters 48-71 : Called from s:/_flash/shared_haxe/tinkerbell_h3/src/tink/macro/tools/TypeTools.hx:228: characters 16-40 : Called from s:/_flash/shared_haxe/tinkerbell_h3/src/tink/macro/tools/TypeTools.hx:203: characters 19-37 : Called from s:/_flash/shared_haxe/tinkerbell_h3/src/tink/macro/tools/TypeTools.hx:224: characters 63-91 : Called from s:/_flash/shared_haxe/tinkerbell_h3/src/tink/macro/tools/TypeTools.hx:203: characters 19-37 : Called from

I am identifying atm what is happening but I think I can imagine what example would cause this. I think this can be fixed by passing a cache array of complex types around these functions.

[MetaChrome]

Yah it appears that this occurs on recursive constraints. Namely:

<T:Poolable_i<T>>. 

(they btw, are officially supported)

[MetaChrome]

I attempted to resolve the issue with the following which ends up in a stackoverflow when attempting to use the complex type in building:

static function paramsToComplex(params:Array<Type>, ?local_params:StringMap<TypePath>):Array<TypeParam> {
    var ret = [];
    for (p in params) 
        ret.push(TPType(toComplex(p, true, local_params)));
    return ret;
}
static function baseToComplex(t:BaseType, params:Array<Type>, ?local_params:StringMap<TypePath>) 
    return asComplexType(t.module + '.' + t.name, paramsToComplex(params, local_params));

static public function toComplex(type:Type, ?pretty = false, ?local_params:StringMap<TypePath>):ComplexType {
    return 
        if (pretty) {
            if (local_params==null) {
                local_params=new StringMap<TypePath>();
            }
            switch (type) {
                case TEnum(t, params):
                    var t = t.get();
                    if(t.isPrivate)
                        return toComplex(type, false);
                    baseToComplex(t, params, local_params);
                case TInst(t, params):
                    var t = t.get();
                    if(t.isPrivate)
                        return toComplex(type, false);
                    switch (t.kind) {
                        #if haxe3
                        case KTypeParameter(constraints):
                            if(local_params.exists(t.name)) {
                                TPath(local_params.get(t.name));
                            } else {
                                var p:TypePath = asTypePath(t.name);
                                local_params.set(t.name,p);
                                p.params=paramsToComplex(constraints,local_params);
                                TPath(p);
                            }
                        #else
                        case KTypeParameter: asComplexType(t.name);
                        #end
                        default: baseToComplex(t, params, local_params);
                    }

Edit: Nvm, I think the above might actually be correct. I am using the above complex type as defined in a class declaration and replacing it's parameters with implementing types. I think I need to just replace kind with an applicable type or something along those lines. A complex type with the parameters implemented obviously doesn't need constraints.

Irregardless would be nice to have confirmation that the above is correct.

[MetaChrome]

Well, as specified this is still an open issue with the proposed fix as above. I am not sure if the proposed recursive structure specified is acceptable to the haxe compiler but one would presume so.

However, with regards to the stackoverflow I encountered, that was due to the fact that declared parameters no longer have a sub field in the TypePath and was unrelated to this.

[MetaChrome]

Please fix. The current implementation is incorrect. The specified change is valid.