This is a precondition for enabling the new pattern-matching subsystem
to support binding patterns that have `if` expressions in the type
position.
---------
Co-authored-by: Richard Smith <richard@metafoo.co.uk>
Use it in the remaining few places where we currently hardcode `i32`: as
the index type in array indexing, as the type for literals in `if`
expressions, and as a valid return type for `Run`.
In preparation for changing `Core.Int` to be a class.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jon Ross-Perkins <jperkins@google.com>
For the few remaining uses of the builtin `i32` type, manually build an
`IntType(Signed, 32)` value instead. These are:
- The return type of `Run`.
- The type that int literals in an `if` expression are converted into.
- The type of an array index expression.
We should consider converting those three cases away from `i32` over
time.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jon Ross-Perkins <jperkins@google.com>
When an `IntLiteral` appears as an operand of an `if` expression,
convert it to `i32` for now, so that we don't reject things like `if
cond then 1 else 2` due to having a non-constant value of type
`IntLiteral`.
For tuple indexing expressions such as `(a, b).0`, convert the index to
type `IntLiteral`, not to type `i32`. This isn't strictly necessary to
do in this PR, but avoids the need to provide an `IntLiteral` -> `i32`
implicit conversion for `no_prelude` tests using this syntax.
This is for consistency with #4120. Similar to that, we can use
overloads on the typed NodeId rather than individually named handlers.
There isn't the same caller benefit here though, since the calls from
check.cpp are already boilerplate.
Most of these are places where we failed to include a header file and
simply never got an error about this. The fix is to include the header
file.
Most other cases are functions that should have been marked `static` but
were not. Finding all of these was a main motivation for me enabling the
warning despite how much work it is.
One complicating factor was that we weren't including the `handle.h` for
all the state-based handler functions. While this isn't a tiny amount of
code, it is just declarations and doesn't add any extra dependencies. It
also lets us have the checking for which functions need to be `static`
and which don't. For the `parse` library I had to add the `handle.h`
header as well, I tried to match the design of it in `check`.
I have also had to work around a bug in the warning, but given the value
it seems to be providing, that seems reasonable. I've filed the bug
upstream: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/94138
I also had to use some hacks to work around limitations of Bazel rules
that wrap `cc_library` rules and don't expose `copts`. I filed a bug for
`cc_proto_library` specifically:
~https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/issues/22610~https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/issues/4446
These can't be supported by `TryEvalInst`, because we don't track
sufficient information about predecessors and branch conditions in SemIR
to efficiently compute the constant result. Even if we could do so, we
may not want to treat all `BlockArg`s for which we can infer a constant
value as being constants. Instead, set the constant value explicitly
after creating the corresponding `BlockArg` instruction.
This was previously discussed at
https://discord.com/channels/655572317891461132/655578254970716160/1209975051588210729.
I'm initiating this mainly because we typically use "id" suffixes to
indicate an `IdBase` being passed around and the non-id suffix of
`parse_node` suggests at it carrying more data than it actually does.
There used to be more reason for avoiding `node_id` because
`SemIR::InstId` used to be named `NodeId`, but that's no longer
necessary. As a consequence, I'd like to rename `parse_node` to more
precisely reflect its type.
In full, this is doing:
```
parse_node_kind -> node_kind
parse_node -> node_id
ParseNodeCategory -> NodeCategory
ParseNodeKind -> NodeKind
ParseNode -> NodeId
```
This is primarily in check and sem_ir, but with some `parse_node_kind`
references in parse too.
Pluralization is consistent with name forms on both sides, so that
wasn't part of my replacements.
Goal is to increase type safety, though more work needs to be done (see
added TODOs).
Note that, after this change, check handlers corresponding to deleted
parse node kinds will no longer compile.
---------
Co-authored-by: Chandler Carruth <chandlerc@gmail.com>
Geoff RomerandRichard Smith
Jon Ross-Perkins
Chandler Carruth
josh11bandChandler Carruth