Add `Dependent` value and initializing representations for types whose
representations are unknown because they are dependent. When generating
SemIR in such cases, use a worst-case initializing representation that
both provides a destination address and also propagates a potential
result value.
Use this to fix incorrect lowering and lowering crashes for specific
functions involving generic types that don't use a copy value
representation.
In lowering, be careful to distinguish between whether the initializing
representation for the generic return type uses a return slot (which
affects whether the SemIR declaration and call have one) and whether the
initializing representation for the specific return type uses a return
slot (which affects whether the LLVM IR declaration and call have one).
This is in support of a goal of changing the blanket `destroy` impl to
use (roughly):
```
private fn CanAggregateDestroy() -> type = "type.can_aggregate_destroy";
// Handles aggregate type destruction.
impl forall [AggregateDestroyT:! CanAggregateDestroy()] AggregateDestroyT as Destroy {
fn Op[addr self: Self*]() = "type.aggregate_destroy";
}
```
That isn't done here because there's still other issues that migrating
raises. What this *does* do is add the builtin functions, and in
particular, support to `FacetTypeInfo` to make `CanAggregateDestroy`
work.
The "special requirement" approach in `FacetTypeInfo` allows us to
support restricting a blanket impl under the current approach of impls.
Maybe we'll find a cleaner approach that can work in the future, but
this fits into the current model by propagating similar to other
requirements. I'm using an enum mask because we have a number of similar
things to add (e.g. copy, move) but I'm not sure we need a full vector.
A few alternatives considered were:
- Supporting syntax more like `where .Self impls
TypeCanAggregateDestroy(.Self, SupportedInterface,
UnsupportedInterface)`. I think it'd be a little cleaner, but requires
better compile-time evaluation in order to assess the type of the call.
Right now it's expected to be a `FacetType` too early to make this work,
and I was concerned about pouring too much more time down this route.
- Providing an actual interface, in particular doing name lookup back
into `Core.` for an interface. This would've added name lookup overhead,
and the question of whether an `impl` exists.
- Generating an interface. This avoids the name lookup, but would still
raise the question of whether an `impl` should also be generated. Work
I've previously done generating interfaces for class destruction also
feels complex to both write and understand (an unfortunate issue).
- Still modeling as an `ImplsConstraint`, for example by defining a
special `InterfaceId::CanAggregateDestroy = -2` similar to what we do on
other ids. I was hesitant because of how this expands the number of
modes of `InterfaceId`, and things for consuming code to watch out for,
for what feels like a relatively niche set of use-cases that are only
interface-like.
---------
Co-authored-by: Dana Jansens <danakj@orodu.net>
When returning a value from a function whose return type has a by-copy
initializing representation, perform initialization like we do when the
return type has an in-place initializing representation. This makes our
SemIR representation more uniform, as the return expression will now
always be an initializing expression rather than a value expression, but
more importantly it means that attempts to return a non-copyable type by
value now fail, even if the type has a by-copy initializing
representation.
This catches a bunch of places where we were returning a value of an
unconstrained template parameter `T:! type`, which we were incorrectly
allowing because we didn't notice it was not copyable. Unfortunately
this then requires quite a few test updates.
Like #6034, this exposes a lowering issue where lowering crashes when
attempting to lower a specific copy operation for certain types; a
couple more tests are temporarily disabled here. An upcoming PR
dependent on this one will fix the issue and re-enable those tests.
Add missing builtins for float compound assignment, for building a
FloatType, and for converting a float literal to FloatType. Switch
`Core.Float` to being a class and add impls for the various
floating-point operators.
---------
Co-authored-by: google-labs-jules[bot] <161369871+google-labs-jules[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Carbon Infra Bot <carbon-external-infra@google.com>
Use `full.carbon` min-prelude for any tests using the full prelude. A
few tests were using it unnecessarily and are changed to a more minimal
one in the process.
Any test which does not include some min-prelude will now fail with an
error.
This changes `Destroy` to use an interface for its implementation.
Note that this change includes a lot of test updates. Even when
`Destroy` is a no-op, it still causes code generation as part of
determining that.
Originally I was trying to use ranges to cut down the scope of this, and
to a degree I think they have. But a flipside here is that cases where
no destructors should be generated -- particularly globals -- would be
needed to completely remove destructor calls. Even for ranges, the range
can often include the destructor placement. So I've shifted
frame-of-thought a little: accept a bunch of destructor churn, because
destructors are needed and will be prevalent. The verbosity is a feature
of the design to make desugaring apparent in IR, not a bug.
Richard Smith
Jon Ross-PerkinsandDana Jansens
Chandler Carruth
Alina Sbirlea