Better analysis for function completion

[Adrian Pop]

We need way better analysis to find out which functions are complete and can be called during compilation.
Currently we consider non-complete:

• partial functions
• replaceable functions

but this is rather wrong and not really correct.
Unfortunately the Modelica Specification does not say anything about this, maybe we should add a ticket about it in the Modelica Trac.

[Adrian Pop]

Actually, the only time we need to evaluate functions is for structural parameters/constants.

For all the other we can just leave call into place. The only issue might be with package constants, but we could have the package constants in the DAE, i.e.

omcglobal.packagename.path.to.constant.name

and use this name everywhere where is needed.
Hopefully we'll do something like this in the new inst.

[Martin Sjölund]

Postponed until 1.9.1

[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]

@perost, is this still relevant?

[Per Östlund]

Replying to casella:

@perost, is this still relevant?

Maybe? We haven't implemented function evaluation in the new instantiation yet, but I guess we do need to make sure any functions being used is valid. I don't really see what the issue would be though.