Cyclic default-bindings in functions are still accepted

[Martin Sjölund]

The check should probably be moved to the instantiation of functions (because we fall back to generation of code). We can check for usage of unbound variables in the same place later on...

function f
  output Real y = y;
end f;

model A
  Real y = f();
end A;

function f
  output Real y = y;
end f;

class A
  Real y = 5.79776549334303e-316;
end A;
Error: Cyclically dependent constants or parameters found in scope : {y}

[Martin Sjölund]

This ticket was not closed for 1.9.1, which has now been released. It was batch modified for milestone 1.9.2 (but maybe an empty milestone was more appropriate; feel free to change it).

[Martin Sjölund]

Milestone changed to 1.9.3 since 1.9.2 was released.

[Martin Sjölund]

Moved to new milestone 1.9.4

[Martin Sjölund]

Milestone pushed to 1.9.5

[Martin Sjölund]

Milestone renamed

[Martin Sjölund]

Ticket retargeted after milestone closed

[Martin Sjölund]

Milestone moved to 1.12.0 due to 1.11.0 already being released.

[Francesco Casella]

It is unclear to me what the problem is here. Function f is not used in class A. Where should the cyclic dependency come from?

[Martin Sjölund]

That's the code from the flat Modelica. The output is now:

function f
  output Real y = y;
end f;

class A
  Real y = f();
end A;
[/home/marsj/tmp/a.mo:1:1-3:6:writable] Error: Cyclically dependent constants or parameters found in scope : {y} (ignore with -d=ignoreCycles).

But translation still continues...

[Francesco Casella]

The milestone of this ticket has been reassigned to "Future".

If you think the issue is still valid and relevant for you, please select milestone 1.13.0 for back-end, code generation and run-time issues, or 2.0.0 for front-end issues.

If you are aware that the problem is no longer present, please select the milestone corresponding to the version of OMC you used to check that, and set the status to "worksforme".

In both cases, a short informative comment would be welcome.