| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
Fixes #1990
The underlying problem here is in the `ExtractExistentialType` AST node class.
An "existential" in current Slang is typically a value of interface type. When such a value is used in an operation, the type-checker "opens" the extistential so that subsequent type-checking steps can work with the (statically unknown) specific type of the value stored inside. The `ExtractExistentialType` AST node represents the type of an existential that has been "opened" in this way.
When the front-end performs lookup "into" a value with one of these types, it nees to use a reference to the original interface declaration with a "this-type substitution" that refers to the "opened" type (a this-type substitution tells the compiler the concrete type it should use in place of `This` in signatures within the interface; it allows compiler to "see" the right associated type definitions to use in a context).
Prior to this change, the implementation would store the specialized reference to the original interface declaration in the `ExtractExistentialType` node as part of its state. The catch there is that the specialized interface reference indirectly refers to the `ExtractExistentialType` AST node itself, creating a circularity. As soon as the front-end performs any operation that tries to recurse over that structure, it would go into an infinite loop.
The fix here sounds kind of like a hack, but seems to be pretty nice in practice. Instead of always storing the specialized interface reference, we instead store the few values that are needed to construct it, and then create and cache the actual reference on-demand. The on-demand created fields are not considered part of the state of the AST node for any kind of recursion or serialization, so they avoid the original problem.
A single test case was added that represents the original bug, and confirms the fix.
|
|
* Add debug symbols for release build.
* Hack to try and capture failing compilation.
* Typo fix for capture hack.
* Specify return type on lambdas.
* Added const.
* Try breakpoint.
* Up count
* Let's capture everything so we can valgrind.
* Disable always writing repros.
* Make Scope non RefCounted.
* Fix issue with not serializing Scope.
* More comments around changes to Scope.
Remove Scope* from serialization.
* Remove code used for testing original issue.
|
|
* #include an absolute path didn't work - because paths were taken to always be relative.
* Split out compiler-core initially with just slang-source-loc.cpp
* More lexer, name, token to compiler-core.
* Split Lexer and Core diagnostics.
* Move slang-file-system to core.
* Add slang-file-system to core.
* More DownstreamCompiler into compiler-core
* Fix typo.
* Add compiler-core to bootstrap proj.
* Small fixes to premake
* For linux try with compiler-core
* Remove compiler-core from examples.
* Added NameConventionUtil to compiler-core
* Add global function to CharUtil to *hopefully* avoid linking issue.
* Hack to make linkage of CharUtil work on linux.
|
|
The basic feature here is the ability to use the `&` operator to produce the conjunction/intersection of two interfaces. That is, you can have interfaces:
interface IFirst { int getFirst(); }
interface ISecond { int getSecoond(); }
and if you need a generic function where the type parameter `T` must conform to *both* of these interfaces, you express that by constraining the parameter to the intersection of the interfaces:
void someFunction<T : IFirst & ISecond>(T value) { ... }
Without this feature, the main alternative an application would have is to define an intermediate interface, like:
interface IBoth : IFirst, ISecond {}
Forcing users to deal with an intermediate interface creates more work for type authors (they need to remember to inherit from the right combined interface(s)), or for `extension` authors (when you add `ISecond` to a type that used to just support `IFirst`, you had better also add `IBoth`). In the worst case, a family of N related "leaf" interfaces would give rise to an exponential number of intermediate interfaces to represnt the possible combinations.
A conjunction like `IFirst & ISecond` is officially its own type, and can be used to declare a type alias:
typealias IBoth = IFirst & ISecond;
This change only includes the first pass of work on this feature, so there are several caveats to be aware of:
* Using a conjunction as part of an inheritance clause is not yet supported (e.g., `struct X : IFirst & ISecond`). This is true even if the conjunction was introduced by an intermediate `typealias`
* The `&` syntax introduced here is only parsed in places where only a type (not an expression) is possible. This means you cannot do things like cast to a conjunction with `(IFirst & ISecond)(someValue)`.
* This work *should* apply to conjunctions of more than two interfaces (like `IA & IB & IC`) but that has not yet been tested
* In the long run it may be sensible to allow conjunctions that use concrete types, but we really ought to have the semantic checking logic rule that out for now.
* During testing, I encountered compiler crashes when trying to use this feature together with `property` declarations. Further investigation and debugging is called for.
* The handling of conjunction types is currently incomplete, in that there are many equivalences the compiler does not yet understand. For example, it is clear that `IA & IB` is equivalent to `IB & IA`, but the compiler currently does not understand this and will treat them as different types. A deeper implementation approach is called for.
* Conjunctions are currently only supported for generic type parameter constraints, when performing full specialization. Use of conjunctions for existential-type value parameters or with dynamic dispatch is not yet supported.
|
|
The big picture here is that an `extension` can now apply to an interface type and provide convenience methods for all types that implement that interface. Suppose you have an interface for counters:
interface ICounter { [mutating] void add(int val); }
and a type that implements it:
struct SimpleCounter : ICounter { int _state = 0; ... }
If a common operation in your codebase is to increment a counter by adding one, you would be faced with the problem of either:
* Add the `increment()` operation to `ICounter`, and force every implementation to implement the new requirement
* Add the `increment()` operation to concrete counter types as needed, and thus not be able to use it in generic code
* Make `increment()` a global ("free") function, and force clients of counters to have to know which operations use member syntax (`c.add(...)`) and which use global function call syntax (`increment(c)`).
The whole idea of `extension`s is to allow for another option that is better than all of the above:
extension ICounter { [mutating] void increment() { this.add(1); } }
The core of the implementation is relatively straightforward, and consists of two complementary pieces.
The first piece is that when emitting a concrete IR entity (function/type/whatever) we treat any enclosing `interface` type (or `extension` thereof) a bit like an enclosing `GenericDecl`, and introduce an `IRGeneric` to wrap things. The generic `IRGeneric` has parameters representing the `This` type for the interface, along with the witness table that shows how `This` conforms to the interface itself.
We thus end up with an IR version of `increment()` something like:
void increment<This : ICounter>(This this) { this.add(1); }
The second (complementary) fix is that when there is code that references this `increment()` operation, we don't treat it like an interface requirement (look up based on its key), and instead treat it like a generic (since that is how it is lowered now) and speciaize it to the information we can glean from the `ThisTypeSubstitution`.
A related fix that is required here is that within the body of `increment`, when we perform `this.add`, we need to ensure that the lookup of `add` in the base interface properly takes into account the subtype relationship (`This : ICounter`) and encodes it into the lookup result, so that we get `((ICounter) this).add`, and properly generate code that looks up the `add` method in the witness table for `This`.
|
|
* Clean up the way that lookup "through" a base type is encoded
In order to undestand this change, it is important to undestand how lookup through base interfaces works prior to this change. In order to understand *that* it helps to be reminded of how inheritance relationships get encoded in the AST.
Suppose the user writes:
struct Base { int val; }
struct Derived : Base { ... }
...
Derived d = ...;
int v = d.val;
The question is how an expression like `d.val` gets semantically checked, and how it is encoded into the IR after semantic checking. You might assume it gets checked and encoded so that we end up with:
int v = ((Base) d).val;
and that seems like it should Just Work... so of course that isn't what Slang has been doing. Instead, we relied on the fact that the inheritance relationship `Derived : Base` is represented as an `InheritanceDecl` member of the `Derived` type, and we ended up checking the code into something like:
int v = d.<anonymous>.val;
where `<anonymous>` stands in for the name of the `InheritanceDecl` that represents inheritance from `Base`. This design choice makes a limited amount of sense when you consider how inheritance would typically be lowered to a C-like output language:
// struct Derived : Base { ... }
// =>
struct Derived { Base base; ... }
The problem with that encoding is that it really doesn't make sense for almost any other scenario. In particular, if you have a generic type parameter `T` that was constrianed with `T : ISomething`, then the constraint isn't even technically a *member* of the type parameter `T`, so expressing thing as a member reference in the AST is completely incorrect. Unfortunately, by the time it was clear that we needed something better, a bunch of implementation work was done based on the existing representation.
This change tries to clean things up so that lookup of a super-type member through a value of a sub-type does the obvious thing: cast the value to the super-type and then look up the member (as in `((Base) d).val`).
The core of the change is that in lookup, instead of creating `Constraint` breadcrumbs whenever we are looking up in a super-type (with a reference to the `TypeConstraintDecl` being used) we instead use `SuperType` breadcrumbs (with a reference to a `SubtypeWitness`). Then when we create the expression from a `LookupResultItem`, we translate any `SuperType` breadcrumbs into `CastToSuperTypeExpr`s (an expression type that already existed).
This change also adds support for lookup through the `This` type in the context of an interface, and in order for that to work we need a new kind of subtype witness to represent the knowledge that a `This` type is a subtype of the enclosing interface. Making that work forces us to change the representation of `TransitiveSubtypeWitness` so that it takes a pair of subtype witnesses (and not one subtype witness plus one `TypeConstraintDecl`). For the most part this is a small change, but it raises the possibility that some pieces of the code aren't going to be robust against all possible shapes of subtype witnesses.
The IR lowering logic has relied on the weird `d.<anonymous>` representation in order to ensure that when looking up interface members we weren't always casting to the interface type (which would create a `makeExistential` instruction), and then calling using that. Basically, the IR lowering would ignore the `d.<anonymous>` part and just emit `d`, but we can't do that for `((Base) d)` or `((IThing) d)` because whehter or not we should actually perform the cast depends on context.
For now we solve that problem by adding specific logic to ignore up-casts to interface types when they appear in member expressions or method calls. A more robust solution might be needed down the line, but this seems to work in practice.
All of this work is cleanup that I found was needed in order to make `extension`s of `interface` types workable.
* fixup: disable an incorrect test
|
|
dispatch) (#1508)
* Allow calling a generic function with an existential value (dynamic dispatch).
* Fixes per review comments.
* Clean up implementation by having `openExistential` return `ExtractExistentialType` instead of a DeclRef to the interface with a `ThisTypeSubstitution`.
* More cleanups
Co-authored-by: Tim Foley <tfoleyNV@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Yong He <yhe@nvidia.com>
|
|
The basic problem here was that in a declaration like:
```hlsl
enum Color : uint { Red, Orange, ... }
```
The `: uint` bit is represented as an `InheritanceDecl`, because that is what we use to represent the syntactic form of inheritance clauses like that. At the point where we parse the `InheritanceDecl` we don't yet know whether it represents a base interface or a "tag type" like `uint` in this case.
The root problem that is then created is: an `enum` type is *not* a subtype of its "tag type," and treating it like a subtype can create problems.
The main problem that arises is that looking in a type like `Color` will find both the members of color *and* the members of `uint`. In the case of things like `__init` declarations, that creates a problem where the `Color` type has two different `__init`s that take a `uint`:
* The one it inherits from `uint` via that `InheritanceDecl` (even though it shouldn't)
* The one it gets via an extension just for conforming to `__EnumType` (a non-user-exposed `interface` in the standard library)
Because both of those `__init`s are inherited, neither is preferred over the other one and they create an ambiguity if somebody tries to write:
```hlsl
uint u = ...;
Colorc = Color(u);
```
The solution used in this PR is to add a compiler-internal modifier to the `InheritanceDecl` that introduces a "tag type" to an `enum`, in an early phase of checking (one of the ones that occurs before it is legal to enumerate the bases of a type). Then the lookup process is modified to ignore `InheritanceDecl`s with that modifier when doing lookup in super-types (since the declaration does *not* indicate a subtype/supertype relationship).
This appears to get the basic feature working again, although it is possible that there are other parts of the compiler that use `InheritanceDecl`s and mistakently assume that all `InheritanceDecl`s introduce subtype/supertype relationships. We probably need to do a significant audit of the code to start being more clear about the nature of the relationships such declarations introduce. Such steps are left to future changes.
Co-authored-by: Yong He <yonghe@outlook.com>
|
|
During semantic checking, the compiler used to link together `ExtensionDecl`s into a singly-linked list dangling off of the `AggTypeDecl` that they applied to. This approach made lookup relatively easy, because given a `DeclRef` to an `AggTypeDecl` one could easily find and walk the list of candidate extensions.
Unfortunately, the simple approach has two major strikes against it:
* First, as we recently ran into, it creates a lifetime/ownership problem, in cases where the `ExtensionDecl` is outlived by the `AggTypeDecl` it applies to. This creates the one and only place in the compiler today where an "old" AST node might point to a "new" AST node, and it resulted in use-after-free problems in client code.
* Second, the scoping of `extension`s ends up being completely wrong. All of the `extension` methods on a type end up being visible in all cases, instead of just in the context of modules where the `extension` itself is visible. The comparable feature in C# (static extension methods) is careful to not make scoping mistakes like this. The Swift langauge has loose scoping for `extension` more akin to what we have in Slang today, but the maintainers seem to consider it a misfeature.
This change attempts to clean up both issues by changing the way that extension declarations are stored. There are two main pieces:
1. The primary "source of truth" for extension lookup has been moved to the `ModuleDecl`, where a module is responsible for storing a cache of the extensions declared within that module (keyed by the declaration of the type being extended). This cache is updated at the same point where the old code would mutate the AST node being depended on.
2. A secondary aggregated cache is added to the `SharedSemanticsContext` used during semantic checking. This cache includes entries from across multiple modules, and is intended to be invalidated and rebuilt on demand if new modules are added during checking.
Access to the candidate extensions has now been put behind subroutines that require a semantics-checking context to be passed in (there was always one available in contexts that care about extensions).
In addition, the operation for looking up members including those from extensions was refactored heavily to involve internal rather than external iteration and, more importantly, was changed so that it actually tests whether the `ExtensionDecl`s it loops over apply to the type in question, rather than blindly letting extensions members be looked up in ways that don't make sense.
There are three test cases added here to confirm aspects of the fix:
* First, I added a test that reproduces the crash that was being seen, so that we have a regression test for the fix.
* Second, I added a basic semantic-checking test to confirm that an `extension` from an `import`ed module is still visible/usable, to confirm that I didn't break existing valid uses of extensions.
* Third, I added a diagnostic test that ensures that we correctly ignore extensions that should not be visible in a given context as a result of `import` declarations.
Co-authored-by: jsmall-nvidia <jsmall@nvidia.com>
|
|
* Initial work on property declarations
Introduction
============
The main feature added here is support for `property` declarations, which provide a nicer experience for working with getter/setter pairs.
If existing code had something like this:
```hlsl
struct Sphere
{
float4 centerAndRadius; // xyz: center, w: radius
float3 getCenter() { return centerAndRadius.xyz; }
void setCenter(float3 newValue) { centerAndRadius.xyz = newValue; }
// similarly for radius...
}
void someFunc(in out Sphere s)
{
float3 c = s.getCenter();
s.setCenter(c + offset);
}
```
It can be expressed instead using a `property` declaration for `center`:
```hlsl
struct Sphere
{
float4 centerAndRadius; // xyz: center, w: radius
property center : float3
{
get { return centerAndRadius.xyz; }
set(newValue) { centerAndRadius.xyz = newValue; }
}
// similarly for radius...
}
void someFunc(in out Sphere s)
{
float3 c = s.center;
s.center = c + offset;
}
```
The benefits at the declaration site aren't that signficiant (e.g., in the example above we actually have slightly more lines of code), but the improvement in code clarity for users is significant.
Having `property` declarations should also make it easier to migrate from a simple field to a property with more complex logic without having to first abstract the use-site code using a getter and setter.
An important future benefit of `property` syntax will be if we allow `interface`s to include `property` requirements, and then also allow those requirements to be satisfied by ordinary fields in concrete types.
Subscripts
----------
The Slang compiler already has limited (stdlib-use-only) support for `__subscript` declarations, which are conceptually similar to `operator[]` from the C++ world, but are expressed in a way that is more in line with `subscript` declarations in Swift. A `SubscriptDecl` in the AST contains zero or more `AccessorDecl`s, which correspond to the `get` and `set` clauses inside the original declaration (there is also a case for a `__ref` accessor, to handle the case where access needs to return a single address/reference that can be atomically mutated).
A major goal of the implementation here is to re-use as much of the infrastructure as possible for `__subscript` declarations when implementing `property` declarations.
Nonmutating Setters
-------------------
One additional thing added in this change is the ability to mark a `set` accessor on either a subscript or a property as `[nonmutating]`, and indeed all of the existing `set` accessors declared in the stdlib have been marked this way.
The need for this modifier is a bit subtle. If we think about a typical subscript or property:
```hlsl
struct MyThing
{
int f;
property p : int
{
get { return f; }
set(newValue) { f = newValue; }
}
}
```
it is clear we want the `set` accessor to translate to output HLSL as something like:
```
void MyThing_p_set(inout MyThing this, int newValue)
{
this.f = newValue;
}
```
Note how the implicit `this` parameter is `inout` even though we didn't mark anything as `[mutating]`. This is the obvious thing a user would expect us to generate given a property declaration.
Now consider a case like the following:
```hlsl
struct MyThing
{
RWStructuredBuffer<int> storage;
property p : int
{
get { return storage[0]; }
set(newValue) { storage[0] = newValue; }
}
}
```
This new declaration doesn't require (or want) an `inout` `this` parameter at all:
```
void MyThing_p_set(MyThing this, int newValue)
{
this.storage[0] = newValue;
}
```
In fact, given the limitations in the current Slang compiler around functions that return resource types (or use them for `inout` parameters), we can only support a `set` operation like this if we can ensure that the `this` parameter is considered to be `in` instead of `inout`. This is exactly the behavior we allow users to opt into with a `[nonmutating] set` declaration.
All of the subscript operations in the stdlib today have `set` accessors that don't actually change the value of `this` that they act on (e.g., storing into a `RWStructuredBuffer` using its `operator[]` doesn't change the value of the `RWStructuredBuffer` variable -- just its contents).
We'd gotten away without this detail so far just because `set` accessors were only being declared in the stdlib and they were all implicitly `[nonmutating]` anyway, so it never surfaced as an issue that the code we generated assumed a setter wouldn't change `this`.
Implementation
==============
Parser and AST
--------------
Adding a new AST node for `PropertyDecl` and the relevant parsing logic was mostly straightforward. The biggest change was allowing a `set` declaration to introduce an explicit name for the parameter that represents the new value to be set.
This change also adds a `[nonmutating]` attribute as a dual to `[mutating]`, for reasons I will get to later.
Semantic Checking
-----------------
The `getTypeForDeclRef` logic was updated to allow references to `property` declarations.
Some of the semantic checking work for subscripts was pulled out into re-usable subroutines to allow it to be shared by `__subscript` and `property` declarations.
The checking of accessor declarations, which sets their result type based on the type of the outer `__subscript` was changed to also handle an outer `property`.
Some special-case logic was added for checking of `set` declarations to make sure that their parameter is given the expected type.
Some logic around deciding whether or not `this` is mutable had to be updated to correctly note that `this` should be mutable by default in a `set` accessor, with an explicit `[nonmutating]` modifier required to opt out of this default. (This is the inverse of how a typical method or `get` accessor works).
IR Lowering
-----------
The good news is that after IR lowering, access to properties turns into ordinary function calls (equivalent to what hand-written getters and setters would produce), so that subsequent compiler steps (including all the target-specific emit logic) doesn't have to care about the new feature.
The bad news is that adding `property` declarations has revealed a few holes in how IR lowering was handling `__subscript` declarations and their accessors, so that it didn't trivially work for the new case as-is.
The IR lowering pass already has the `LoweredValInfo` type that abstractly represents a value that resulted from lowering some AST code to the IR. One of the cases of `LoweredValInfo` was `BoundSubscript` that represented an expression of the form `baseVal[someIndex]` where the AST-level expression referenced a `__subscript` declaration. The key feature of `BoundSubscript` is that it avoided deciding whether to invoke the getter, the setter, or both "too early" and instead tried to only invoke the expected/required operations on-demand.
This change generalizes `BoundSubscript` to handle `property` references as well, so it changes to `BoundStorage`. Making the type handle user-defined property declarations required fixing a bunch of issues:
* When building up argument lists in the IR, we need to know whether an argument corresponds to an `in` or an `out`/`inout` parameter, to decide whether to pass the value directly or a pointer to the value. Some of the logic in the lowering pass had been playing fast and loose with this, so this change tries to make sure that whenever we care computing a list of `IRInst*` that represent the arguments to a call we have the information about the corresponding parameter.
* Similarly, when emitting a call to an accessor in the IR, the information about the expected type of the callee was missing/unavailable, and the code was incorrectly building up the expected type of the callee based on the types of the arguments at the call site. The logic has been changed so that we can extract the expected signature of an accessor (how it will be translated to the IR) using the same logic that is used to produce the actual `IRFunc` for the accessor (so hopefully both will always agree).
* Dealing with `in` vs. `inout` differences around parameters means also dealing with the "fixup" code that is used to assign from the temporary used to pass an `inout` argument back into the actual l-value expression that was used. That logic has all been hoisted out of the expression visitor(s) and into the global scope.
Future Work
===========
The entire approach to handling l-values in the IR lowering pass is broken, and it is in need a of a complete rewrite based on new first-principles design goals. While something like `LoweredValInfo` is decent for abstracting over the easy cases of r-values, addresses, and a few complicated l-value cases like swizzling, it just doesn't scale to highly abstract l-values like we get from `__subcript` and `property` declarations, nor other corner cases of l-values that we need to handle (e.g., passing an `int` to an `inout float` parameter is allowed in HLSL, and performs conversions in both directions!).
It Should be Easy (TM) to extend the logic that tries to synthesize an interface conformance witness method when there isn't an exact match to also support synthesizing a property declaration (plus its accessors) to witness a required property when the type has a field of the same name/type.
* fixup: pedantic template parsing error (thanks, clang!)
* fixup: cleanups and review feedback
* Removed some `#ifdef`'d out code from merge change
* Added proper diagnostics for accessor parameter constraints, which led to some fixes/refactorings
* Added a test case for the accessor-related diagnostics
|
|
The main new feature that works here is that a derived `struct` type can satisfy one or more interface requirements using methods it inherited from a base `struct` type:
```hlsl
interface ICounter { [mutating] void increment(); }
struct CounterBase { int val; [mutating] void increment() { val++; } }
struct ResetableCounter : CounterBase, ICounter
{
[mutating] void reset() { val = 0; }
}
```
Here the derived `ResetableCounter` type is satisfying the `increment()` requirement from `ICounter` using the inherited `CounterBase` method instead of one defined on `ResetableCounter`.
The crux of the problem here was that after lowering to HLSL/GLSL, the above code looks something like:
```hlsl
struct CounterBase { int val; };
void CounterBase_increment(in out CounterBase this) { this.val++; }
struct ResetableCounter { CounterBase base; }
void ResetableCounter_reset(in out ResetableCounter this) { this.base.val = 0; }
```
The central problem is that `CounterBase_increment` here is not type-compatible what we expect to find in the witness table for `ResetableCounter : ICounter`: the `this` parameter has the wrong type!
The basic solution strategy here is to intercept the search for a witness to sastify an interface requirement in `findWitnessForInterfaceRequirement` (those witnesses get collected into a witness table). The revised logic first looks for an exact match, which will only consider members introduced for the type itself, and not those introduced by base types.
If an exact match for a method requirement is not found, the semantic checker then tries to *synthesize* a witness for the requirement, which more or less amounts to generating a function like:
```hlsl
[mutating] void ResetableCounter::synthesized_increment()
{
this.increment();
}
```
The body of that synthesized method will type-check just fine in this case (because it desugars into `this.base.increment()`, more or less), and thus the synthesized method declaration can be used as the actual witness that drives downstream code generation.
Details:
* I added some options to lookup to allow us to explicitly skip member lookup through base interfaces; this should make sure that we don't accidentally satisfy an interface requirement using a member of the same or another interface (since such members are conceptually `abstract`).
* As it originally stood, the semantic checker was allowing `CounterBase.increment()` to satisfy the `increment()` requirement of `ResetableCounter` directly, with the result that we got invalid HLSL/GLSL code as output. In order to avoid this and other bad cases, I made sure that the "exact match" case of requirement satisfaction ignores members that included any "breadcrumbs" in the lookup result item (since the breadcrumbs would all indicate transformations that needed to be applied to `this` to find the right member).
* If we eventually have targets where `this` is passed by pointer/reference in all cases, then all of this work is not needed for the common case of single inheritance, and the base-type method should be usable as a witness directly. I don't see any easy way to handle that special case without producing target-dependent code in the front-end. It might be that we need an IR pass that can detect functions that are trivial "forwarding" functions and replace them with the function they forward to.
* This change includes a test case that should have come along with the original PR that started adding struct inheritance
Caveats:
* The comments in this change talk about things like allowing a method with a default parameter to satisfy a requirement without that parameter. That scenario won't actually work at present because we still have an enormous hack in our logic for checking methods against requirements: we don't actually consider their signatures! I couldn't fold a fix for that issue into this change because there are subtle corner cases around associated types that we need to handle correctly (which were part of the reason why the checking is as hacked as it is)
* This change does *not* try to test or address the case where we want to have a `Derived` type conform to `ISomething` because it inherits from `Base` and `Base : ISomething`. That case has its own details that need to be worked out, but ideally can follow a similar implementation strategy when it comes to re-using methods from `Base` to satisfy requirement on `Derived`.
|
|
* Add a ASTBuilder to a Module
Only construct on valid ASTBuilder (was being called on nullptr on occassion)
* Add nodes to ASTBuilder.
* Compiles with RefPtr removed from AST node types.
* Initialize all AST node pointer variables in headers to nullptr;
* Initialize AST node variables as nullptr.
Make ASTBuilder keep a ref on node types.
Make SyntaxParseCallback returns a NodeBase
* Don't release canonicalType on dtor (managed by ASTBuilder).
* Give ASTBuilders a name and id, to help in debugging.
For now destroy the session TypeCache, to stop it holding things released when the compile request destroys ASTBuilders.
* Moved the TypeCheckingCache over to Linkage from Session.
* NodeBase no longer derived from RefObject.
* Only add/dtor nodes that need destruction.
First pass compile on linux.
|
|
* Small improvements to documentation and code around DiagnosticSink
* Made methods/functions in slang-syntax.h be lowerCamel
Removed some commented out source (was placed elsewhere in code)
* Making AST related methods and function lowerCamel.
Made IsLeftValue -> isLeftValue.
|
|
* Compiles.
* Small tidy up around session/ASTBuilder.
* Tests are now passing.
* Fix Visual Studio project.
* Fix using new X to use builder when protectedness of Ctor is not enough.
Substitute->substitute
* Add some missing ast nodes created outside of ASTBuilder.
* Compile time check that ASTBuilder is making an AST type.
* Moced findClasInfo and findSyntaxClass (essentially the same thing) to SharedASTBuilder from Session.
|
|
* Fields from upper to lower case in slang-ast-decl.h
* Lower camel field names in slang-ast-stmt.h
* Fix fields in slang-ast-expr.h
* slang-ast-type.h make fields lowerCamel.
* slang-ast-base.h members functions lowerCamel.
* Method names in slang-ast-type.h to lowerCamel.
* GetCanonicalType -> getCanonicalType
* Substitute -> substitute
* Equals -> equals
ToString -> toString
* ParentDecl -> parentDecl
Members -> members
* * Make hash code types explicit
* Use HashCode as return type of GetHashCode
* Added conversion from double to int64_t
* Split Stable from other hash functions
* toHash32/64 to convert a HashCode to the other styles.
GetHashCode32/64 -> getHashCode32/64
GetStableHashCode32/64 -> getStableHashCode32/64
* Other Get/Stable/HashCode32/64 fixes
* GetHashCode -> getHashCode
* Equals -> equals
* CreateCanonicalType -> createCanonicalType
* Catches of polymorphic types should be through references otherwise slicing can occur.
* Fixes for newer verison of gcc.
Fix hashing problem on gcc for Dictionary.
* Another fix for GetHashPos
* Fix signed issue around GetHashPos
|
|
* Fields from upper to lower case in slang-ast-decl.h
* Lower camel field names in slang-ast-stmt.h
* Fix fields in slang-ast-expr.h
* slang-ast-type.h make fields lowerCamel.
* slang-ast-base.h members functions lowerCamel.
* Method names in slang-ast-type.h to lowerCamel.
* GetCanonicalType -> getCanonicalType
* Substitute -> substitute
* Equals -> equals
ToString -> toString
* ParentDecl -> parentDecl
Members -> members
|
|
Currently we fail to diagnose code that calls an instance method from a static method using implicit `this`, and instead crash during lowering of the AST to the IR.
This change introduces a bit more detail to the "this parameter mode" that is computed during lookup, so that it differentiates three cases. The existing two cases of a mutable `this` and immutable `this` remain, but we add a third case where the "this parameter mode" only allows for a reference to the `This` type.
When turning lookup "breadcrumb" information into actual expressions, we respect this setting to construct either a `This` or `this` expression.
In order to actually diagnose the incorrect reference, I had to add code around an existing `TODO` comment that noted how we should diagnose attempts to refer to instance members through a type. Enabling that diagnostic revealed a missing case needed by generics (including those in the stdlib) - a type-constraint member is always referenced statically.
Putting the diagnostic for a static reference to a non-static member in its new bottleneck location meant that some code higher up the call static that handles explicit static member references had to be tweaked to not produce double error messages.
This change includes a new diagnostic test to show that we now give an error message on code that makes this mistake, instead of crashing.
|
|
* Improve performance of building members dictionary by adding when needed.
* Fix unbounded-array-of-array-syntax.slang, that DISABLE_TEST now uses up an index. Use IGNORE_TEST.
* Improve variable name.
Small improvements.
Co-authored-by: Tim Foley <tfoleyNV@users.noreply.github.com>
|
|
This change adds logic for parsing `namespace` declarations, referencing them, and looking up their members.
* The parser changes are a bit subtle, because that is where we deal with the issue of "re-opening" a namespace. We kludge things a bit by re-using an existing `NamespaceDecl` in the same parent if one is available, and thereby ensure that all the members in the same namespace can see on another.
* In order to allow namespaces to be referenced by name they need to have a type so that a `DeclRefExpr` to them can be formed. For this purpose we introduce `NamespaceType` which is the (singleton) type of a reference to a given namespace.
* The new `NamespaceType` case is detected in the `MemberExpr` checking logic and routed to the same logic that `StaticMemberExpr` uses, and the static lookup logic was extended with support for looking up in a namespace (a thin wrapper around one of the existing worker routines in `slang-lookup.cpp`.
* I made `NamespaceDecl` have a shared base class with `ModuleDecl` in the hopes that this would allow us to allow references to modules by name in the future. That hasn't been tested as part of this change.
* I cleaned up a bunch of logic around `ModuleDecl` holding a `Scope` pointer that was being used for some of the more ad hoc lookup routines in the public API. Those have been switched over to something that is a bit more sensible given the language rules and that doesn't rely on keeping state sititng around on the `ModuleDecl`.
* I added a test case to make sure the new funcitonality works, which includes re-opening a namespace, and it also tests both `.` and `::` operations for lookup in a namespace.
* The main missing feature here is the ability to do something like C++ `using`. It would probably be cleanest if we used `import` for this, since we already have that syntax (and having both `import` and `using` seems like a recipe for confusion). Most of the infrastructure is present to support `import`ing one namespace into another (in a way that wouldn't automatically pollute the namespace for clients), but some careful thought needs to be put into how import of namespaces vs. modules should work.
|
|
The actual definitions that got moved into the stdlib here are pretty few:
* `clip()`
* `cross()`
* `dxx()`, `ddy()` etc.
* `degrees()`
* `distance()`
* `dot()`
* `faceforward()`
The meat of the change is infrastructure changes required to support these new declarations
* Generic versions of the standard operators (e.g., `operator+`) were added that are generic for a type `T` that implements the matching `__Builtin`-prefixed interface. An open question is whether we can now drop the non-generic versions in favor of just having these generic operators.
* A `__BuiltinLogicalType` interface was added to capture the commonality between integers and `bool`
* `__BuiltinArithmeticType` was extended so that implementations must support initialization from an `int`
* `__BuiltinFloatingPointType` was extended to require an accessor that returns the value of pi for the given type, and the concrete floating-point types were extended to provide definitions of this value.
* It turns out that our logic for checking if two functions have the same signature (and should thus count as redeclarations/redefinitions) wasn't taking generic constraints into account at all. That was fixed with a stopgap solution that checks if the generic constraints are pairwise identical, but I didn't implement the more "correct" fix that would require canonicalizing the constraints.
* When doing overload resolution and considering potential callees, logic was added so that a non-generic candidate should always be selected over a generic one (generally the Right Thing to do), and also so that a generic candidate with fewer parameters will be selected over one with more (an approximation of the much more complicated rule we'd ideally have).
* The formatting of declarations/overloads for "ambiguous overload" errors was fleshed out a bit to include more context (the "kind" of declaration where appropriate, the return type for function declarations) and to properly space thing when outputting specialization of operator overloads that end with `<` (so that we print `func < <int>(int, int)` instead of just `func <<int,int>(int,int)`).
* The core lookup routines were heavily refactored and reorganized to try to make them bottleneck more effectively so that all paths handle all the nuances of inheritance, extensions, etc.
* Because of the refactoring to lookup logic, the semantic checking logic related to checking if a type conforms to an interface was updated to be driven based on the `Type` that is supposed to be conforming, rather than a `DeclRef` to the type's declaration. This allows it to use the type-based lookup entry point and eliminates one special-case entry point for lookup.
In addition to the various core changes, this change also refactors some of the existing stdlib code to favor writing more things in actual Slang syntax, and less in C++ code that uses `StringBuilder` to construct the Slang syntax. There is a lot more that could be done along those lines, but even pushing this far is showing that the current approach that `slang-generate` takes for how to separate meta-level C++ and Slang code isn't really ideal, so a revamp of the generator code is probably needed before I continue pushing.
One surprising casualty of the refactoring of lookup is that we no longer have the `lookedUpDecls` field in `LookupResult`. That field probably didn't belong there anyway, but the role it served was important. The idea of `lookedUpDecls` was to avoid looking up in the same interface more than once in cases where a type might have a "diamond" inheritance pattern. Removing that field doesn't appear to affect correctness of any of our existing tests, but by adding a specific test for "diamond" inheritance I could see that the refactoring introduced a regression and made looking up a member inherited along multiple paths ambiguous.
Rather than add back `lookedUpDecls` I went for a simpler (but arguably even hackier) solution where when ranking candidates from a `LookupResult` we check for identical `DeclRef`s and arbitrarily favor one over the other. One complication that arises here is that when comparing `DeclRef`s inherited along different paths they might have a `ThisTypeSubstitution` for the same type, but with different subtype witnesses (because different inheritance paths could lead to different transitive subtype witnesses: e.g., `A : B : D` and `A : C : D`).
|
|
The basic idea is that the user can write:
```hlsl
struct MyThing
{
int a;
float b;
__init(int x, float y)
{
a = x;
b = y;
}
}
```
and after that point, they can create an intstance of their `MyThing` type as simply as `MyThing(123, 4.56f)`.
There was already a large amount of infrastructure laying around that is shared between ininitializers and ordinary functions, so enabling this feature mostly amounted to tying up some loose ends:
* In the parser, make sure to properly push/pop the scope for an `__init` (or `__subscript`) declaration, so parameters would be visible to the body
* In semantic checking, make sure that declaration "header" checking properly bottlenecks all the function-like cases into a base routine
* In semantic checking, make sure that the logic for checking function bodies applies to every `FunctionDeclBase` with a body, and not just `FuncDecl`s
* Update semeantic checking for statements to allow for any `FunctionDeclBase` as the parent declaration, not just a `FuncDecl`
* In lookup, treat the `this` parameter of an `__init` (well, not actually a *parameter* in this case) as being mutable, just like for a `[mutating]` method
* In IR codegen, don't just assume that all `__init`s are intrinsics, and narrow the scope of that hack to just `__init`s without bodies
* In IR codegen, detect when we are emitting an IR function for an `__init`, and in that case create a local variable to represent the `this` value, and implicitly return that value at the end of the body.
From that point on the rest of the compiler Just Works and IR codegen doesn't have to think of an `__init` as being any different than if the user had declared a `static MyThing make(...)` function.
Caveats:
* C++ users might like to use that naming convention (so `MyThing` as the name instead of `__init`). We can consider that later.
* Everybody else might prefer a keyword other than `__init` (e.g., just `init` as in Swift), but I'm keeping this as a "preview" feature for now, rather than something officially supported
* Early `return`s from the body of an `__init` aren't going to work right now.
* There is currently no provision for automatically synthesizing initializers for `struct` types based on their fields. This seems like a reasonable direction to take in the future.
* There is no provision for routing `{}`-based initializer lists over to initializer calls. The two syntaxes probably need to be unified at some point so that doing `MyType x = { a, b, c }` and `let x = MyType(a, b, c)` are semantically equivalent.
It is possible that as a byproduct of this change user-defined `__subscript`s might Just Work, but I am guessing there will still be loose ends on that front as well, so I will refrain from looking into that feature until we have a use case that calls for it.
|
|
The HLSL language has keywords with very common names like `triangle`, and Slang doesn't want to preclude users from using such names for their variables/functions/etc.
In addition, Slang adds new keywords on top of HLSL (like `extension`) and we don't want those to prevent us from compiling existing code.
As a result, almost all keywords in Slang are contextual keywords, and they can be shadowed by user varaibles.
The down-side to making all keywords contextual is that in a case like this:
```
int test() { return triangle; }
```
The identifier `triangle` is *not* undefined as far as lookup (it is defined as a modifier keyword), so the existing "undefined identifier" logic gets bypassed, and instead we ran into an internal compiler error trying to construct an expression that refers to a modifier keyword.
Fortunately, the internal compiler error in that case was overkill, and the compiler already had defensive logic to produce an expression with an error type if it couldn't figure out what the type of a declaration reference should be.
The main fix here is thus to emit an "undefined identifier" error instead of an internal compiler error at the point where we see an attempt to reference a declaration that shouldn't be available in an expression context.
In order to improve the quality of the diagnostic, the code for constructing declaration references was updated to pass along a source location to be used in error messages.
|
|
* Support conversion from int/uint to enum types
The basic feature here is tiny, and is summarized in the code added to the stdlib:
```
extension __EnumType
{
__init(int val);
__init(uint val);
}
```
The front-end already makes all `enum` types implicitly conform to `__EnumType` behind the scenes, and this `extension` makes it so that all such types inherit some initializers (`__init` declarations, aka. "constructors") that take `int` and `uint`.
(Note: right now all `__init` declarations in Slang are assumed to be implemented as intrinsics using `kIROp_Construct`. This obviously needs to change some day, especially so that we can support user-defined initializers.)
Actually making this *work* required a bit of fleshing out pieces of the compiler that had previously been a bit ad hoc to be a bit more "correct." Most of the rest of this description is focused on those details, since the main feature is not itself very exciting.
When overload resolution sees an attempt to "call" a type (e.g., `MyType(3.0)`) it needs to add appropriate overload candidates for the initializers in that type, which may take different numbers and types of parameters. The existing code for handling this case was using an ad hoc approach to try to enumerate the initializer declarations to consider, which might be found via inheritance, `extension` declarations, etc.
In practice, the ad hoc logic for looking up initializers was just doing a subset of the work that already goes into doing member lookup. Changing the code so that it effectively does lookup for `MyType.__init` allows us to look up initializers in a way that is consistent with any other case of member lookup. Generalizing this lookup step brings us one step closer to being able to go from an `enum` type `E` to an initializer defined on an `extension` of an `interface` that `E` conforms to.
One casualty of using the ordinary lookup logic for initializers is that we used to pass the type being constructed down into the logic that enumerated the initializers, which made it easier to short-circuit the part of overload resolution that usually asks "what type does this candidate return."
It might seem "obvious" that an initializer/constructor on type `Foo` should return a value of type `Foo`, but that isn't necessarily true.
Consider the `__BuiltinFloatingPointType` interface, which requires all the built-in floating-point types (`float`, `double`, `half`) to have an initializer that can take a `float`.
If we call that interface in a generic context for `T : __BuiltinFloatingPointType`, then we want to treat that initializer as returning `T` and not `__BuiltinFloatingPointType`.
Without the ad hoc logic in initializer overload resolution, this is the exact problem that surfaced for the stdlib definition of `clamp`.
The solution to the "what type does an initializer return" problem was to introduce a notion of a `ThisType`, which refers to the type of `this` in the body of an interface.
More generally, we will eventually want to have the keyword `This` be the type-level equivalent of `this`, and be usable inside any type.
The `calcThisType` function introduced here computes a reasonable `Type` to represent the value of `This` within a given declaration.
Inside of concrete type it refers to the type itself, while in an `interface` it will always be a `ThisType`.
The existing `ThisTypeSubstitution`s, previously only applied to associated types, now apply to `ThisType`s as well, in the same situations.
The next roadblock for making the simple declarations for `__EnumType` work was that the lookup logic was only doing lookup through inheritance relationships when the type being looked up in was an `interface`.
The logic in play was reasonable: if you are doing lookup in a type `T` that inherits from `IFoo`, then why bother looking for `IFoo::bar` when there must be a `T::bar` if `T` actually implements the interface?
The catch in this case is that `IFoo::bar` might not be a requirement of `IFoo`, but rather a concrete method added via an `extension`, in which case `T` need not have its own concrete `bar`.
The simple/obvious fix here was to make the lookup logic always include inherited members, even when looking up through a concrete type.
Of course, if we allow lookup to see `IFoo::bar` when looking up on `T`, then we have the problem that both `T::bar` and `IFoo::bar` show up in the lookup results, and potentially lead to an "ambiguous overload" error.
This problem arises for any interface rquirement (so both methods and associated types right now).
In order to get around it, I added a somewhat grungy check for comparing overload candidates (during overload resolution) or `LookupResultItem`s (during resolution of simple overloaded identifiers) that considers a member of a concrete type as automatically "better" than a member of an interface.
The Right Way to solve this problem in the long run requires some more subtlety, but for now this check should Just Work.
One final wrinkle is that due to our IR lowering pass being a bit overzealous, we currently end up trying to emit IR for those new `__init` declarations, which ends up causing us to try and emit IR for a `ThisType`.
That is a case that will require some subtlty to handle correctly down the line, for for now we do the expedient thing and emit the `ThisType` for `IFoo` as `IFoo` itself, which is not especially correct, but doesn't matter since the concrete initializer won't ever be called.
* testing: add more debug output to Unix process launch function
* testing: increase timeout when running command-line tests
|
|
* Split apart `SemanticsVisitor`
The existing `SemanticsVisitor` type was the visitor for expressions, statements, and declarations, and its monolithic nature made it hard to introduce distinct visitors for different phases of checking (despite the fact that we had, de facto, multiple phases of declaration checking).
This change splits up `SemanticsVisitor` as follows:
* There is nosw a `SharedSemanticsContext` type which holds the shared state that all semantics visiting logic needs. This includes state that gets mutated during the course of semantic checking.
* The `SemanticsVisitor` type is now a base class that holds a pointer to a `SharedSemanticsContext`. Most of the non-visitor functions are still defined here, just to keep the code as simple as possible. The `SemanticsVisitor` type is no longer a "visitor" in any meaningful way, but retaining the old name minimizes the diffs to client code.
* There are distinct `Semantics{Expr|Stmt|Decl}Visitor` types that have the actual `visit*` methods for an appropriate subset of the AST hierarchy. These all inherit from `SemanticsVisitor` primarily so that they can have easy access to all the helper methods it defines (which used to be accessible because these were all the same object).
Any client code that was constructing a `SemanticsVisitor` now needs to construct a `SharedSemanticsContext` and then use that to initialize a `SemanticsVisitor`. Similarly, any code that was using `dispatch()` to invoke the visitor on an AST node needs to construct the appropriate sub-class and then invoke `dispatch()` on it instead.
This is a pure refactoring change, so no effort has been made to move state or logic onto the visitor sub-types even when it is logical. Similarly, no attempt has been made to hoist any code out of the common headers to avoid duplication between `.h` and `.cpp` files. Those cleanups will follow.
The one cleanup I allowed myself while doing this was getting rid of the `typeResult` member in `SemanticsVisitor` that appears to be a do-nothing field that got written to in a few places (for unclear reasons) but never read.
* Remove some statefulness around statement checking
Some of the state from the old `SemanticsVisitor` was used in a mutable way during semantic checking:
* The `function` field would be set and the restored when checking the body of a function so that things like `return` statements could find the outer function.
* The `outerStmts` list was used like a stack to track lexically surrounding statements to resolve things like `break` and `continue` targets.
Both of these meant that semantic checking code was doing fine-grained mutations on the shared semantic checking state even though the statefullness wasn't needed.
This change moves the relevant state down to `SemanticsStmtVisitor`, which is a type we create on-the-fly to check each statement, so that we now only need to establish the state once at creation time.
The list of outer statements is handled as a linked list threaded up through the stack (a recurring idiom through the codebase).
There was one place where the `function` field was being used that wasn't strictly inside statement checking: it appears that we were using it to detect whether a variable declaration represents a local, so I added an `_isLocalVar` function to serve the same basic purpose.
With this change, the only stateful part of `SharedSemanticsContext` is the information to track imported modules, which seems like a necessary thing (since deduplication requires statefullness).
* Refactor declaration checking to avoid recursion
The flexiblity of the Slang language makes enforcing ordering on semantic checking difficult. In particular, generics (including some of the built-in standard library types) can take value arguments, so that type expressions can include value expressions. This means that being able to determine the type of a function parameter may require checking expressions, which may in turn require resolving calls to an overloaded function, which in turn requires knowing the types of the parameters of candidate callees.
Up to this point there have been two dueling approaches to handling the ordering problem in the semantic checking logic:
1. There was the `EnsureDecl` operation, supported by the `DeclCheckState` type. Every declaration would track "how checked" it is, and `EnsureDecl(d, s)` would try to perform whatever checks are needed to bring declaration `d` up to state `s`.
2. There was top-down orchestration logic in `visitModuleDecl()` that tried to perform checking of declarations in a set of fixed phases that ensure things like all function declarations being checked before any function bodies.
Each of these options had problems:
1. The `EnsureDecl()` approach wasn't implemented completely or consistently. It only understood two basic levels of checking: the "header" of a declaration was checked, and then the "body," and it relied on a single `visit*()` routine to try and handle both cases. Things ended up being checked twice, or in a circular fashion.
2. Rather than fix the problems with `EnsureDecl()` we layered on the top-down orchestration logic, but doing so ignores the fact that no fixed set of phases can work for our language. The orchestration logic was also done in a relatively ad hoc fashion that relied on using a single visitor to implement all phases of checking, but it added a second metric of "checked-ness" that worked alongside `DeclCheckState`.
This change strives to unify the two worlds and make them consistent. One of the key changes is that instead of doing everything through a single visitor type, we now have distinct visitors for distinct phases of semantic checking, and those phases are one-to-one aligned with the values of the `DeclCheckState` type.
More detailed notes:
* Existing sites that used to call `checkDecl` to directly invoke semantic checking recursively now use `ensureDecl` instead. This makes sure that `ensureDecl` is the one bottleneck that everything passes through, so that it can guarantee that each phase of checking gets applied to each declaration at most once.
* The existing `visitModuleDecl` was revamped into a `checkModule` routine that does the global orchestration, but now it is just a driver routine that makes sure `ensureDecl` gets called on everything in an order that represents an idealized "default schedule" for checking, while not ruling out cases where `ensureDecl()` will change the ordering to handle cases where the global order is insufficient.
* Because `checkModule` handles much of the recursion over the declaration hierarchy, many cases where a declaration `visit*()` would recurse on its members have been eliminated. The only case where a declaration should recursively `ensureDecl()` its members is when its validity for a certain phase depends on those members being checked (e.g., determining the type of a function declaration depends on its parameters having been checked).
* All cases where a `visit*()` routine was manually checking the state/phase of checking have been eliminated. It is now the responsibility of `ensureDecl` to make sure that checking logic doesn't get invoked twice or in an inappropriate order.
* Most cases where a `visit*()` routine was manually *setting* the `DeclCheckState` of a declaration have been eliminated. The common case is now handled by `ensureDecl()` directly, and `visit*()` methods only need to override that logic when special cases arise. E.g., when a variable is declared without a type `(e.g., `let foo = ...;`) then we need to check its initial-value expression to determine its type, so that we must check it further than was initially expected/required.
* This change goes to some lengths to try and keep semantic checking logic at the same location in the `slang-check-decl.cpp` file, so each of the per-phase visitor types is forward declared at the top of the file, and then the actual `visit*()` routines are interleaved throughout the rest of the file. A future change could do pure code movement (no semantic changes) to arrive at a more logical organization, but for now I tried to stick with what would minimize the diffs (although the resulting diffs can still be messy at times).
* One important change to the semantic checking logic was that the test for use of a local variable ahead of its declaration (or as part of its own initial-value expression) was moved around, since its old location in the middle of the `ensureDecl` logic made the overall flow and intention of that function less clear. There is still a need to fix this check to be more robust in the future.
* Add some design documentation on semantic checking
The main thing this tries to lay out is the strategy for declaration checking and the rules/constraints on programmers that follow from it.
* fixup: typos found during review
|
|
* Prefixing source files in source/slang with slang-
* Prefix source in source/slang with slang- prefix.
* Rename core source files with slang- prefix.
* Update project files.
* Fix problems from automatic merge.
|
