carbon-language/carbon-lang
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/carbon-language/carbon-lang.git synced 2026-10-06 08:54:47 +01:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

Check equality constraints when checking whether a constraint is satisfied (#2294)

Browse Source 
Add checking that a type only satisfies a constraint if it satisfies all of that constraint's equality and rewrite constraints.

Enforce the rule that `=` must be used in impls when specifying associated constant values rather than `==`.

Turn off the pre-#2173 single-step equality behavior. This is getting somewhat ahead of the approved design, but it's a one-line change to restore the old behavior.

Fix `CARBON_CHECK` to handle top-level `,`s in its argument, such as may happen in template argument lists, as this change introduces such a check.
This commit is contained in:
Richard Smith
2022-10-17 22:07:19 -07:00
committed by GitHub
parent 8ee0ecec94
commit 4b679510e7
43 changed files with 443 additions and 200 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
explorer/interpreter/value.cpp
+7 -4
View File
@@ -512,7 +512,10 @@ void Value::Print(llvm::raw_ostream& out) const {
break;
case Value::Kind::AssociatedConstant: {
const auto& assoc = cast<AssociatedConstant>(*this);
out << "(" << assoc.base() << ")." << assoc.constant().binding().name();
out << "(" << assoc.base() << ").(";
PrintNameWithBindings(out, &assoc.interface().declaration(),
assoc.interface().args());
out << "." << assoc.constant().binding().name() << ")";
break;
}
case Value::Kind::ContinuationValue: {
@@ -629,7 +632,7 @@ auto TypeEqual(Nonnull<const Value*> t1, Nonnull<const Value*> t2,
return true;
}
if (t1->kind() != t2->kind()) {
if (isa<AssociatedConstant>(t1) || isa<AssociatedConstant>(t2)) {
if (IsValueKindDependent(t1) || IsValueKindDependent(t2)) {
return ValueEqual(t1, t2, equality_ctx);
}
return false;
@@ -942,7 +945,7 @@ auto ValueEqual(Nonnull<const Value*> v1, Nonnull<const Value*> v2,
// associated constant; otherwise we should be able to do better by looking
// at the structures of the values.
if (equality_ctx) {
if (isa<AssociatedConstant>(v1)) {
if (IsValueKindDependent(v1)) {
auto visitor = [&](Nonnull<const Value*> maybe_v2) {
return !ValueStructurallyEqual(v2, maybe_v2, equality_ctx);
};
@@ -950,7 +953,7 @@ auto ValueEqual(Nonnull<const Value*> v1, Nonnull<const Value*> v2,
return true;
}
}
if (isa<AssociatedConstant>(v2)) {
if (IsValueKindDependent(v2)) {
auto visitor = [&](Nonnull<const Value*> maybe_v1) {
return !ValueStructurallyEqual(v1, maybe_v1, equality_ctx);
};