Per feedback on #7665, this PR switches the default value
table storage from canonical constant inst_ids to
non-canonical.
Furthermore, this PR simplifies the default value support in
check by requiring that the first owned declaration of a
function completely specify all of its default values.
Updates the diagnostic code and tests to reflect this new
stricter requirement.
Adds check functionality to transform the parse node to SemIR. Only
supported for single declarations of functions, re-declaration and
imports to come in a subsequent PR.
Per #7521.
The constant value may lose the designator during eval, such as an
`ImplWitnessAccess` that resolves to some concrete type. Look in the
non-canonical instructions instead.
- A function with a return declaration always has exactly one
`ReturnSlotPattern`, representing the whole return declaration (whereas
previously that was omitted for value and reference returns).
- The `ReturnSlotPattern` always has a subpattern with the same form.
`OutParamPattern` already plays that role for initializing forms, and
`TuplePattern` will play that role for tuple forms. This change
introduces `ValueReturnPattern` and `RefReturnPattern` to represent
value and reference return forms.
- As before, the `ReturnSlotPattern` has a corresponding `ReturnSlot`
that represents the output that is initialized by a `return` statement.
Its structure parallels the structure of the `ReturnSlotPattern`, so we
need `ValueReturn` and `RefReturn` insts that correspond to
`ValueReturnPattern` and `RefReturnPattern`.
This is a step toward supporting generic return forms, where the
`ReturnSlotPattern`'s subpattern may be an action: this change ensures
that evaluating the action for a specific form produces the same SemIR
as if the form were concrete to begin with. More speculatively, this
should simplify the implementation of `return` statements with compound
return forms.
---------
Co-authored-by: Chandler Carruth <chandlerc@gmail.com>
This separates the return type from the return pattern, and replaces the
return pattern with a block of return patterns. This is a step toward
support for `ref` returns (where there's no corresponding return
pattern) and compund-form returns (where there may be multiple return
patterns).
According to approved syntax at
https://github.com/carbon-language/carbon-lang/blob/trunk/proposals/p3848.md#syntax-defined,
`fn F[]` without explicit parameters should be valid. This makes it
work, then adds some validation to prevent `class C[]` in check.
Note that for `fn`, positional parameters are a TODO -- but this allows
me to test validation in `fn destroy[]` which is rejected, not just a
TODO.
Parameter lists need substantially different treatment than tuple
patterns in other contexts, so this change splits them into separate
parse node kinds.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jon Ross-Perkins <jperkins@google.com>
Functions with positional parameters omit any implicit or explicit
parameter lists. This causes them to not have a pattern block, which
crashes if there is a return type that needs to add to the pattern
block.
Add a test covering this and handle it by having the ReturnTypeId
handler peek at the node stack and conditionally add the missing pattern
block. To do so it looks to see if the previous node is a
`IdentifierNameNotBeforeParams` which implies it was not expecting a
pattern (since there are no params) and thus the pattern block was not
added to the stack.
Note that lambdas also allow functions to omit an identifier, which will
need a pattern block on the stack for implicit parameters, explicit
parameters or a return type, without seeing any IdentifierName-like
parse nodes. To handle this, we will need to look for additional nodes
in the future and add the missing pattern block to the stack - possibly
for the FunctionInitializer, but the parse support needs to be created
for lambdas first.
If there are no explicit params, then `last_param_node_id` should be
`implicit_params_loc_id`. But there is no use case currently, so for now
we assume explicit params exist and assert if not, so this can be found
and updated then.
High level, replacing `Id::Invalid` with `Id::None` and `Id::is_valid`
with `Id::has_value` for clarity, as discussed
[here](https://discord.com/channels/655572317891461132/655578254970716160/1331664574545395794).
The `IntId` refactoring is needed together with `AnyIdBase` because it's
also used with `ValueStore`.
Note, trying to be careful not to rewrite `EnumBase::InvalidIndex`, or
`is_valid` in general (e.g., `IdKind::is_valid`).
I've tried to sequence commits here:
1. Automatic replacements:
- `((?:Id|Index)(?: |::|\(|Base(?:\(|::)))Invalid((?:Index)?\W)` ->
`$1None$2`
- `<invalid>` -> `<none>`
- `InvalidNodeId` -> `NoneNodeId`
- `/\*invalid\*/` -> `/*none*/`
- `id((?:_|\(\))(?:\.|->))is_valid` -> `id$1has_value`
2. Manual edits:
- In `int.h` and `int_test.cpp`
- `IntT` has `is_value`, which I'm renaming to `is_embedded_value`.
- Manual edits to comments in this file.
- `AnyIdBase` and `IdBase`
- Declaration of `is_valid` -> `has_value`, `InvalidIndex` ->
`NoneIndex`.
- In `ids.h` and `ids.cpp`
- `is_valid` -> `has_value`
- `// An explicitly invalid ID.` -> `// An ID with no value.`; similar
for index
- Various math on `InvalidIndex` -> `NoneIndex`
- Various mentions of "valid" in comments
- In `value_store.h`, for `IdT::Invalid`, plus one comment
- In `impl.h` and `tokenized_buffer.h`, we had different initialization
of `::None` values (versus `ids.h` syntax) that I fixed manually.
- Spot checks to compile
- Particularly where `is_valid` replacements didn't catch spots due to
different naming.
3. Autoupdate tests
4. verbose.carbon (NOAUTOUPDATE)
5. Comment spot checks
Note there are probably other mentions of "Invalid" that should be swept
up, but I'd like to argue for merging and separating out remaining
cleanup since this is so sweeping (and likely to hit merge conflicts
from churn). We'll probably have lingering mentions of "invalid" for a
bit regardless, just because there are uses of "invalid" in non-Id APIs.
This change splits `NodeKind::IdentifierName` into separate node kinds
depending on whether the identifier is followed by parameters, and
similarly splits `NameQualifier` based on whether the qualifier has
parameters. This enables us to only push a pattern block when it's
actually needed, rather than "defensively" pushing one when it might be
needed.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jon Ross-Perkins <jperkins@google.com>
This introduces `calling_convention_param_ids`, a single block that
consolidates all the information that was being used by consumers of
`param_refs` and `implicit_param_refs`, in a form that's easier to
produce and typically easier to consume.
See also [this Discord
discussion](https://discord.com/channels/655572317891461132/655578254970716160/1300545448909738125)
regarding the decision to keep the return slot last in the SemIR calling
convention, even though it goes first in the LLVM calling convention.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jon Ross-Perkins <jperkins@google.com>
Also propagate the pattern IR along with the pattern-match IR, and use
it where appropriate.
Strictly speaking, some parts of the pattern-match IR are allocated
eagerly, while traversing the pattern's parse tree, but they still
aren't actually emitted until we traverse the associated pattern insts.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jon Ross-Perkins <jperkins@google.com>
Introduces the `BindingPattern` and `SymbolicBindingPattern` insts, and
a separate stack of pattern blocks that they are emitted into. The
intent is to generate the corresponding pattern-matching insts (like
`BindName`) from them in a separate pass, but that is deferred to future
PRs.
See
[here](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1U_vQH17V893J9aF1LJXUnFYBNSs2MjKl4bJPaWCB2zo/edit?usp=sharing&resourcekey=0-w0xGYZ0An31Kpz-wvzSXwQ)
for the design this is based on, but note that during review we have
chosen to deviate from that design by putting the patterns in separate
blocks, and omitting the "forward references" from a `BindingPattern` to
its corresponding `BindName`. This in turn necessitates having separate
inst kinds for symbolic and non-symbolic binding patterns.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jon Ross-Perkins <jperkins@google.com>
This is a primarily automated change:
- Search & replace for capitalization
-
`(CARBON_DIAGNOSTIC\((?:\n\s+)?\w+,(?:\n\s+)?\s\w+,(?:\n\s+)?\s")([A-Z])`
- `$1\L$2`
- Search & replace for period
-
`(CARBON_DIAGNOSTIC\((?:\n\s+)?\w+,(?:\n\s+)?\s\w+,(?:\n\s+)?\s"(?:[^)]|\n)+)\.("[,)])`
- `$1$2`
- Limited search & replace for `ERROR: ` -> `error: ` in streamed things
- Leaving a TODO for command_line because there's more cleanup that can
be done there
- Modify diagnostic_consumer.cpp
- ERROR -> error
- WARNING -> warning
---------
Co-authored-by: Richard Smith <richard@metafoo.co.uk>
Note this isn't implementing checking through imports. The parse node
there is harder to access through the context, so would require
examining the entity in order to get the import declaration, to get at
the ImportIR. We also don't have a parse tree attached in that case, and
would need to add one to SemIR::File. But I believe we do want to add
that, so it's explicitly a TODO.
Note GetTokenText re-lexes literal values, so there's a bit of potential
overhead there. Not sure if we want a more efficient manner for
comparing in cases like this.
Previously we did some of this in decl_name_stack and some of it in the
callers of decl_name_stack. Factor out a single place to pop a name and
its optional following parameters.
Part of making this behavior consistent is that we now track whether an
implicit parameter list was present or absent rather than mapping an
absent list to `InstBlockId::Empty`. This improves our redeclaration
checking and the precision of some diagnostics.
Lucile Rose Nihlen
Dana Jansens
Geoff RomerandChandler Carruth
Alina Sbirlea