Add support for static methods in interfaces (#680)

This change allows an interface to include `static` methods as requirements, so that types that conform to the interface will need to satisfy the requirement with a `static` method.

The essence of the check is simple: when checking that a method satisfies a requirement, we enforce that both are `static` or both are non-`static`.

Making that simple change and adding a test change broke a few other places in the compiler that this change tries to fix. The main fix is to handle cases where we might look up an "effectively static" member of a type through an instance, and to make sure that we replace the instance-based lookup with type-based lookup. There was already logic along these lines in `lower-to-ir.cpp`, so this change centralizes it in `check.cpp` where it seems to logically belong.

4 files changed, 159 insertions, 34 deletions

diff --git a/source/slang/check.cpp b/source/slang/check.cpp
index 985c5c0b7..47713e6cc 100644
--- a/source/slang/check.cpp
+++ b/source/slang/check.cpp
@@ -9,6 +9,75 @@
 
 namespace Slang
 {
+
+        /// Should the given `decl` nested in `parentDecl` be treated as a static rather than instance declaration?
+    bool isEffectivelyStatic(
+        Decl*           decl,
+        ContainerDecl*  parentDecl)
+    {
+        // Things at the global scope are always "members" of their module.
+        //
+        if(parentDecl->As<ModuleDecl>())
+            return false;
+
+        // Anything explicitly marked `static` and not at module scope
+        // counts as a static rather than instance declaration.
+        //
+        if(decl->HasModifier<HLSLStaticModifier>())
+            return true;
+
+        // Next we need to deal with cases where a declaration is
+        // effectively `static` even if the language doesn't make
+        // the user say so. Most languages make the default assumption
+        // that nested types are `static` even if they don't say
+        // so (Java is an exception here, perhaps due to some
+        // influence from the Scandanavian OOP tradition of Beta/gbeta).
+        //
+        if(dynamic_cast<AggTypeDecl*>(decl))
+            return true;
+        if(dynamic_cast<SimpleTypeDecl*>(decl))
+            return true;
+
+        // Things nested inside functions may have dependencies
+        // on values from the enclosing scope, but this needs to
+        // be dealt with via "capture" so they are also effectively
+        // `static`
+        //
+        if(dynamic_cast<FunctionDeclBase*>(parentDecl))
+            return true;
+
+        // Type constraint declarations are used in member-reference
+        // context as a form of casting operation, so we treat them
+        // as if they are instance members. This is a bit of a hack,
+        // but it achieves the result we want until we have an
+        // explicit representation of up-cast operations in the
+        // AST.
+        //
+        if(decl->As<TypeConstraintDecl>())
+            return false;
+
+        return false;
+    }
+
+        /// Should the given `decl` be treated as a static rather than instance declaration?
+    bool isEffectivelyStatic(
+        Decl*           decl)
+    {
+        // For the purposes of an ordinary declaration, when determining if
+        // it is static or per-instance, the "parent" declaration we really
+        // care about is the next outer non-generic declaration.
+        //
+        // TODO: This idiom of getting the "next outer non-generic declaration"
+        // comes up just enough that we should probably have a convenience
+        // function for it.
+
+        auto parentDecl = decl->ParentDecl;
+        if(auto genericDecl = parentDecl->As<GenericDecl>())
+            parentDecl = genericDecl->ParentDecl;
+
+        return isEffectivelyStatic(decl, parentDecl);
+    }
+
     // A flat representation of basic types (scalars, vectors and matrices)
     // that can be used as lookup key in caches
     struct BasicTypeKey
@@ -416,6 +485,22 @@ namespace Slang
                     expr->declRef = declRef;
                     return expr;
                 }
+                else if(isEffectivelyStatic(declRef.getDecl()))
+                {
+                    // Extract the type of the baseExpr
+                    auto baseExprType = baseExpr->type.type;
+                    RefPtr<SharedTypeExpr> baseTypeExpr = new SharedTypeExpr();
+                    baseTypeExpr->base.type = baseExprType;
+                    baseTypeExpr->type = new TypeType(baseExprType);
+
+                    auto expr = new StaticMemberExpr();
+                    expr->loc = loc;
+                    expr->type = type;
+                    expr->BaseExpression = baseTypeExpr;
+                    expr->name = declRef.GetName();
+                    expr->declRef = declRef;
+                    return expr;
+                }
                 else
                 {
                     // If the base expression wasn't a type, then this
@@ -2246,6 +2331,13 @@ namespace Slang
                 return false;
             }
 
+            if(satisfyingMemberDeclRef.getDecl()->HasModifier<HLSLStaticModifier>()
+                != requiredMemberDeclRef.getDecl()->HasModifier<HLSLStaticModifier>())
+            {
+                // A `static` method can't satisfy a non-`static` requirement and vice versa.
+                return false;
+            }
+
             // TODO: actually implement matching here. For now we'll
             // just pretend that things are satisfied in order to make progress..
             witnessTable->requirementDictionary.Add(
diff --git a/source/slang/lower-to-ir.cpp b/source/slang/lower-to-ir.cpp
index 3c4067af5..7b63f510f 100644
--- a/source/slang/lower-to-ir.cpp
+++ b/source/slang/lower-to-ir.cpp
@@ -384,6 +384,12 @@ void setValue(IRGenContext* context, Decl* decl, LoweredValInfo value)
     context->env->mapDeclToValue[decl] = value;
 }
 
+
+    /// Should the given `decl` nested in `parentDecl` be treated as a static rather than instance declaration?
+bool isEffectivelyStatic(
+    Decl*           decl,
+    ContainerDecl*  parentDecl);
+
 // Ensure that a version of the given declaration has been emitted to the IR
 LoweredValInfo ensureDecl(
     IRGenContext*   context,
@@ -4446,46 +4452,13 @@ struct DeclLoweringVisitor : DeclVisitor<DeclLoweringVisitor, LoweredValInfo>
     //
     // We also need to be able to detect whether a declaration is
     // either explicitly or implicitly treated as `static`:
-    bool isMemberDeclarationEffectivelyStatic(
-        Decl*           decl,
-        ContainerDecl*  parentDecl)
-    {
-        // Anything explicitly marked `static` counts.
-        //
-        // There is a subtle detail here with a global-scope `static`
-        // variable not really meaning `static` in the same way, but
-        // it doesn't matter because the module shouldn't introduce
-        // any parameters we care about.
-        if(decl->HasModifier<HLSLStaticModifier>())
-            return true;
-
-        // Next we need to deal with cases where a declaration is
-        // effectively `static` even if the language doesn't make
-        // the user say so. Most languages make the default assumption
-        // that nested types are `static` even if they don't say
-        // so (Java is an exception here, perhaps due to some
-        // includence from the Scandanavian OOP tradition).
-        if(dynamic_cast<AggTypeDecl*>(decl))
-            return true;
-
-        // Things nested inside functions may have dependencies
-        // on values from the enclosing scope, but this needs to
-        // be dealt with via "capture" so they are also effectively
-        // `static`
-        if(dynamic_cast<FunctionDeclBase*>(parentDecl))
-            return true;
-
-        return false;
-    }
-    // We also need to be able to detect whether a declaration is
-    // either explicitly or implicitly treated as `static`:
     ParameterListCollectMode getModeForCollectingParentParameters(
         Decl*           decl,
         ContainerDecl*  parentDecl)
     {
         // If we have a `static` parameter, then it is obvious
         // that we should use the `static` mode
-        if(isMemberDeclarationEffectivelyStatic(decl, parentDecl))
+        if(isEffectivelyStatic(decl, parentDecl))
             return kParameterListCollectMode_Static;
 
         // Otherwise, let's default to collecting everything
diff --git a/tests/compute/interface-static-method.slang b/tests/compute/interface-static-method.slang
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..4747c8a8a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tests/compute/interface-static-method.slang
@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+// interface-static-method.slang
+
+//TEST(compute):COMPARE_COMPUTE_EX:-slang -compute
+//TEST(compute):COMPARE_COMPUTE_EX:-slang -compute -dx12
+//TEST(compute, vulkan):COMPARE_COMPUTE_EX:-vk -compute
+
+interface IHideout
+{
+	int getAnimalCount();	
+}
+
+interface ISuperhero
+{
+	associatedtype Hideout : IHideout;
+
+	static Hideout getHideout();
+}
+
+struct Batcave : IHideout
+{
+	int batCount;	
+
+	int getAnimalCount() { return batCount; }
+}
+
+struct Batman : ISuperhero
+{
+	typedef Batcave Hideout;
+
+	static Batcave getHideout()
+	{
+		Batcave batcave = { 100 };
+		return batcave;
+	}
+}
+
+int doIt<T:ISuperhero>()
+{
+	return T.getHideout().getAnimalCount();
+}
+
+int test(int val)
+{
+	return doIt<Batman>();
+}
+
+
+//TEST_INPUT:ubuffer(data=[0 0 0 0], stride=4):dxbinding(0),glbinding(0),out
+RWStructuredBuffer<int> outputBuffer;
+
+[numthreads(4, 1, 1)]
+void computeMain(uint3 dispatchThreadID : SV_DispatchThreadID)
+{
+	int tid = dispatchThreadID.x;
+	outputBuffer[tid] = test(tid);
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/tests/compute/interface-static-method.slang.expected.txt b/tests/compute/interface-static-method.slang.expected.txt
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..b1b8e46f4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tests/compute/interface-static-method.slang.expected.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+64
+64
+64
+64