These appear in `where` clauses, as in:
```
U:! InterfaceB where .C = Vector(.D)
V:! type where Vector(.Self) impls Sortable
```
`.Self` can additionally appear in type expressions in a binding pattern
such as `T:! InterfaceA(.Self)`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Josh L <josh11b@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Jon Ross-Perkins <jperkins@google.com>
Move subtree sizes over to TreeAndSubtrees, using the different
structure to represent the additional parse work that occurs, as well as
making it clear which functions require the extra information. My intent
is to make it hard to use this by accident.
The subtree size is still tracked during Parse::Tree construction. I
think a lot of that can be cleaned up, although we use it during
placeholder assignment so it may take some work. I wanted to see what
people thought about this before taking action on such a change.
I'm using a 1m line source file generated by #4124 for testing. Command
is `time bazel-bin/toolchain/install/prefix_root/bin/carbon compile
--phase=check --dump-mem-usage ~/tmp/data.carbon`
At head, what I'm seeing is:
```
...
parse_tree_.node_impls_:
used_bytes: 61516116
reserved_bytes: 61516116
...
Total:
used_bytes: 447814230
reserved_bytes: 551663894
...
1.43s user 0.14s system 99% cpu 1.565 total
```
With `Tree::Verify` disabled completely, it looks like:
```
parse_tree_.node_impls_:
used_bytes: 41010744
reserved_bytes: 41010744
...
Total:
used_bytes: 427308858
reserved_bytes: 531158522
...
1.20s user 0.13s system 99% cpu 1.332 total
```
Re-enabling just the basic verification (what is now `Tree::Verify`),
I'm seeing maybe 0.05s slower, but that's within noise for my system. I
do see variability in my timing results, and overall I think this is a
0.2s +/- 0.1s improvement versus the earlier (always testing `Extract`
code) implementation. That's opt; debug builds will be unaffected,
because the same checking occurs as before.
Note, the subtree size is a third of the node representation, which is
why I'm showing the decrease in memory usage here.
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
This leaves a single state for each in the expr loop. I was trying to
think through ways to have per-token states, but they felt sort of
bulky.
Note this is more verbose: but I think the long-term is going to be that
when we start wanting to add handlers, we're going to need to switch to
different names based on the token found. As a consequence, the parse
state logic will end up diverging a little, and we'll just want to align
towards boilerplate handlers.
Short-term, this opens up a path for saying that each parse node
corresponds to precisely one token in success states, and separates out
what were becoming big handler functions in check.
This is also doing the parse node split, allowing lower reliance in
formatter on the tokenized buffer (something that I may be touching more
due to import handling).
This creates a namespace for `package` scope.
It looks like names of class_decls in namespaces lead to an unexpected
instref. This is already true, as best as I can tell. I'm not sure if
there's a preferred approach to address that, so I've left a TODO for
now.
I was suggesting this because `FloatingPoint` is pretty long. `int` and
`float` should be familiar abbreviations. `unsigned` should be familiar
to developers too, but `UnsignedInt` still feels usefully clearer for
the additional chars.
Chandler Carruth
cui fliter
czapiga
Richard Smith