This required changing BindingPattern::name() to return `"_"` instead of nullopt when representing a `"_"` binding.
Semi-related drive-by fixes:
- Update BindingPlaceholderValue to expose a NamedEntity instead of a string name, and stop exposing its type.
- Drop the unused SourceLocation parameter of ValueEqual
As a byproduct, replace NamedEntity with a type-erasing wrapper NamedEntityView, eliminate virtual inheritance from the AST, and eliminate interfaces from gen_rtti.
This doesn't actually use the results of name resolution, but it does verify that they are present.
Also ensures that name resolution and type checking are applied to deduced function parameters and the implicit call to `Main()`.
Co-authored-by: Jon Meow <46229924+jonmeow@users.noreply.github.com>
This starts detecting naming collisions as a consequence of being able to determine when the name is declared twice in a given scope.
Co-authored-by: Geoff Romer <gromer@google.com>
This does a mass rename of:
- `SourceLoc()` -> `source_loc()` for property naming
- `loc` -> `source_loc_` for underscore+consistency
- Generally changing function args to `source_loc` for consistency
- `Tag()` -> `kind()` for property naming and `Kind` parity
- `tag` -> `kind_` for underscore
Also renames `Pos` and `Results` on `Action`. These are a bit of an exception in that most base classes only have `Tag` and maybe `SourceLoc`, whereas `Action` has a little more. I felt okay having `source_loc()` and `kind()` on the base class where children do `Exp()` and the like, but it felt weird to me to mix it on the same class.
The reason for doing this cross-class in one PR is so that I can do it efficiently with a global replace in the codebase, rather than e.g. changing `Expression` but having to read through compiler errors to determine where it's calling `Expression`'s `Tag` versus a different `Tag`. The end result should be equivalent.
Sorry about the big change, this is hard to split. ParenContents is used by both, templated, and expects the same pointer type. While I could duplicate ParenContents with some ExpressionParenContents or PatternParenContents, that seems a little kludgy versus a single large change handling both. The worst of it is that Expression is already pretty sweeping, Pattern is really just incrementally adding.
That said, I believe this includes a couple fixes I found with incorrect use of dyn_cast in typecheck.cpp (checked nullptr at the wrong step in 2 code locations). There's also a missing `*` in member.cpp this caught. I adjust passing of expressions for Return due to nullness (I felt adding another constructor was the best solution).
I add a `.Release()` to BisonWrap due to things like `$3.first` needing some way to work through BIsonWrap. I felt this was better than `operator->`, but feel free to comment if you prefer the other path (`.Release()` conveniently lets me do pair unwrapping, so it felt a better solution).
I do add a TODO to think about better Ptr-to-Ptr cast<> support too, though, as that doesn't work cleanly with LLVM's infra. But so far it seems to only come up in one spot, so I'm not prioritizing it.
`Pattern` is intended to pilot some changes I would like to apply to all our sum types:
- The alternatives are expressed as derived classes rather than members of a `std::variant`.
- The alternatives are classes in the [style guide sense](https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html#Structs_vs._Classes), meaning they can have invariants, but can't have public data members.
- Creating an object is expressed using a constructor rather than a factory function.
- Accessing an alternative is expressed as a cast (using LLVM's RTTI system) rather than `std::get` or a `Get` method.
Co-authored-by: Jon Meow <46229924+jonmeow@users.noreply.github.com>
- Switch code to llvm::raw_ostream as part of standardizing output forms.
- Preferring llvm::raw_ostream over std::ostream because other tooling code should be expected to rely on llvm more closely, and an overall preference towards library consistency.
- There are a couple spots in syntax/ that still use std streams, but I'd prefer to take a separate PR to see how best to address those.
- std::boolalpha doesn't work with llvm, so I've implemented equivalent in a couple places (not enough that it felt like worth making a helper function).
- Implement Print(ostream) as consistently as we can, as an instance member.
- This facilitates the use of the common/ostream.h template to provide operators.
- Preferring this approach so that Print is easily accessible via gdb, per suggestion on #executable-semantics.
- Switch code currently calling `type->Print(ostream)` to instead do `ostream << *type`.
- Remove the unused `PrintTypeEnv`, nothing used it and the declaration didn't match the definition.
Notes versus what jsiek wrote:
- This adopts Bazel for building.
- System-local versions of bison/flex are used. I found https://github.com/jmillikin/rules_bison, but those print a lot of warnings (things like -Wsign-compare IIRC) which makes builds hard to read. Plus I think the underlying bison_cc_library rule didn't work, so this would really only get a hermetic bison/flex build (helpful, but didn't seem worth more time).
- I'm adding in a .bazeliskrc to push a somewhat more standard choice of bazel versions. I noticed I was getting unstable versions by default, possible Google-specific, but seemed good to include.
- The `-lpthread` kludge.
- Turn all of the examples into golden tests.
- Including adding a golden test rule.
- Fixed various style guide issues. For example:
- Fixing function names to be CamelCase instead of snake_case (https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html#Function_Names)
- Removed exception use (https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html#Exceptions)
- File name fixes (https://github.com/carbon-language/carbon-lang/blob/trunk/docs/project/cpp_style_guide.md#file-names)
- Dropped `using` of `std` names -- I believe this is preferred (maybe we should be explicit about this in the Carbon style guide)
- Switched `enum` uses to `enum class` for ease-of-identification.
- Spent some time breaking out files to hopefully be easier to read/edit pieces, and understand relations between structs.
- Added `code requires` to `syntax.ypp` to address include issues
Possibly other things -- but the fundamental structure is, I believe, unchanged. I put in the golden tests pretty early to ensure I wasn't mutating output/results.
Geoff Romer
Jeremy G. Siek