This is temporary: eventually per the design we should be forming
integer literals whose types reflect their values. But for now we should
ensure that values fit within their types.
This also fixes canonicalization of integer constants and hence of array
types, because we no longer have multiple different representations of
each `i32` value depending on the bit-width used for the literal.
Previously we used the default inst block formatting, which writes out a
parenthesized list of references, which would always be 'unexpected
instref's because nothing else prints the instructions in the decl
block.
In addition, track the decl block for function declarations like we do
for other kinds of declaration. This means that the parameter
declarations for a function are now properly rendered into the formatted
IR. Note that this adds a lot of verbosity to `function_decl`, but it
does accurately reflect the IR, and we'll probably want this information
to be printed once we start supporting more complex generic function
declarations.
This removes almost all the 'unexpected instref's in our formatted
output. There are remaining cases when a declarative scope contains
multiple blocks, where we only track one of those blocks. That happens
when there is control flow within declarative scopes, and for error
recovery when a class or interface or similar is defined more than once.
As requested in #3730.
`GlobalInit` block is now static block within a `SemIR` which will be
used to emit initialization instructions for variables in the `Package`
scope.
inst_block_stack now has additional methods to handle `GlobalInit` block
separately, this block can be popped without being finalized allowing to
accumulate between all instances of variables.
At the end of the `check` phase, if this block is not empty , the
function `__global_init` will be added with this block being inserted
into it.
This block is pushed to `inst_block_scope` at the end `BindName`,
allowing instruction to be emitted into it, then popped at the semicolon
(VariableDecl).
This significantly changes the `SemIR` output, that's why this commit
updates a lot of the test cases.
To avoid bouncing through `constant_values()` to determine whether a
type is symbolic or template, store the `ConstantId` on the `TypeInfo`
not just the `InstId`.
In addition to propagating the symbolic / template phase, this also
propagates whether a type contains an error, resulting in our no longer
producing types such as `<error>*` -- these now evaluate to simply
`<error>`. While this makes our types less precise after an error, it
also removes some follow-on diagnostics, so it seems to be an
improvement on the whole.
Building on #3636 which handles the general import case, add special
casing for namespaces. Namespaces can be combined cross-IR, so it's a
little more complex.
The implementation adds import_id to the Namespace instruction as a
reference to find the original using the normal structure. This is
achieved by moving the name_id to NameScope to free up space.
---
I considered a few alternatives...
I considered adding import_id to NameScope, but:
1. It's more consistent with things such as Function or Class that
provide name_id on the info object rather than the instruction.
2. I thought it more likely that there would be more NameScope cases
that might want a name_id rather than the import_id, since ImportRef
will typically be used.
I considered putting the import source (cross-ref IR id + inst id) on
the NameScope versus a separate ImportRef, which seems like the
strongest argument towards the NameScope approach because it removes an
instruction. That just felt inconsistent though, and the overhead of
instruction-per-imported-namespace should be low (theoretically few
namespaces should be used). Plus I feel a bit odd adding two
generally-unused ids to NameScope.
A specialized Namespace structure could also have been created to store
the import_id, but that would add an indirection to the NameScope.
Also, form `addr_of error` instead of `addr_of operand` when `operand`
is not a reference expression, so that we don't try to constant-evaluate
a meaningless expression.
Also, expect a constant for an array bound rather than specifically an
integer literal. This allows constant evaluation results to be more
easily tested by inspecting array bounds.
Richard Smith
Gıyaseddin Tanrıkulu
Jon Ross-Perkins