Commit Graph
8 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
Chandler Carruth 8c64f0bfdd Add -Wmissing-prototypes and fix issues it finds. (#4019)
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
2024-06-04 20:04:45 +00:00
Jon Ross-Perkins a034f86272 Change struct literal parsing to use placeholders. (#3850)
This is achieving a similar goal as #3849, using placeholders instead of
an ambiguous start node to clarify structure and incrementally simplify
checking. The benefit isn't quite as big here because both paths are
structs, and so checking is more consistent than paren exprs versus
tuples. But I think this removes the only other multi-purpose parse
node.

This uses StructLiteral/StructTypeLiteral naming, reflecting equivalent
SemIR naming. Note, I would lean towards renaming StructLiteral to
StructValueLiteral, but I think consistency in naming takes precedence.
Any renames of StructLiteral might be better in a separate PR.

StructFieldType/StructFieldValue -> StructTypeField/StructField is
trying to making the reading more consistent with
StructTypeLiteral/StructLiteral. SemIR has StructTypeField but not a
value equivalent.
2024-04-03 20:36:49 +00:00
2e97f27b8d Typed wrappers around parse tree nodes (#3534)
These are intended to allow the structure of a parse tree node to be
described more precisely in code, to support these use cases:

- Automated checking that the parse tree conforms to the expected
structure. (Added to `Tree::Verify`.)
- Easier reading and understanding of the structure of the parse tree by
toolchain developers. (See `parse/typed_nodes.h`.)
- Easier navigation of the parse tree, for example for tooling uses and
for use when forming diagnostics.

On this last point, an object representing the file may be inspecting
using `Tree::ExtractFile`, as in:
```
auto file = tree->ExtractFile();
for (AnyDeclId decl_id : file.decls) {
  // `decl_id` is convertible to a `NodeId`.
  if (std::optional<FunctionDecl> fn_decl =
      tree->ExtractAs<FunctionDecl>(decl_id)) {
    // fn_decl->params is a `TuplePatternId` (which extends `NodeId`)
    // that is guaranteed to reference a `TuplePattern`.
    std::optional<TuplePattern> params = tree->Extract(fn_decl->params);
    // `params` has a value unless there was an error in that node.
  } else if (auto class_def = tree->ExtractAs<ClassDefinition>(decl_id)) {
    // ...
  }
}
```

The `Extract...` functions collect the child nodes into the typed parse
node's fields (internally using a `Tree::SiblingIterator`) for easy
access. However, this is not as fast as directly observing the tree
structure using the postorder strategy being used by the check stage.

These functions rely on using struct reflection on the typed parse node
definitions from `parse/typed_nodes.h` to get the expected structure of
child nodes and then populate them.

Note that validating these in `Tree::Verify` adds significant cost to
it, and is currently included in the parsing stage. Without this change,
a 10 mloc test case of lex & parse takes 4.129 s ± 0.041 s. With this
change, it takes 5.768 s ± 0.036 s.

This builds upon and completes #3393.

Co-authored-by: Richard Smith <richard@metafoo.co.uk>

---------

Co-authored-by: Richard Smith <richard@metafoo.co.uk>
Co-authored-by: Chandler Carruth <chandlerc@gmail.com>
2023-12-22 22:14:11 +00:00
Jon Ross-Perkins 6cc5dc7736 Replace the NodeKind StructFieldUnknown with InvalidParse. (#3482)
StructFieldUnknown was used previously for invalid parses. But we have
added other, more common ways of talking about those; so this is
removing the special-case.
2023-12-12 00:43:04 +00:00
josh11b b7d129b88c Add PushState overload to combine Parse::State change with StateStackEntry (#3485)
Shortens a common `PushState` pattern
2023-12-08 23:58:30 +00:00
Jon Ross-PerkinsandChandler Carruth 0c0998d7cd Error when passing StringRef to CARBON_DIAGNOSTIC. (#3431)
This gets to a lifetime subtlety, particularly with things like the
sorting diagnostic consumer that delay output. In order to reduce the
chance of accidental references, disallow StringRef in the diagnostics.

For example:

```
./toolchain/diagnostics/diagnostic_emitter.h:162:5: error: static_assert failed due to requirement '!std::is_same_v<llvm::StringRef, llvm::StringRef>' "Use std::string or llvm::StringLiteral for diagnostic lifetimes."
    static_assert(
    ^
toolchain/check/convert.cpp:477:11: note: in instantiation of member function 'Carbon::Internal::DiagnosticBase<std::string, std::string, llvm::StringRef>::DiagnosticBase' requested here
          CARBON_DIAGNOSTIC(StructInitMissingFieldInConversion, Error,
          ^
./toolchain/diagnostics/diagnostic_emitter.h:47:7: note: expanded from macro 'CARBON_DIAGNOSTIC'
      ::Carbon::Internal::DiagnosticBase<__VA_ARGS__>(        \
      ^
```

---------

Co-authored-by: Chandler Carruth <chandlerc@gmail.com>
2023-11-29 17:04:11 +00:00
josh11bandJon Ross-Perkins c53b248800 Abbreviate "parameter" -> "param" (#3392)
Part of switching to the [abbreviations we've decided to
use](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RRYMm42osyqhI2LyjrjockYCutQ5dOf8Abu50kTrkX0/edit?resourcekey=0-kHyqOESbOHmzZphUbtLrTw#heading=h.pph7i5m5un7q).

I will rename files in a follow-up PR.

---------

Co-authored-by: Jon Ross-Perkins <jperkins@google.com>
2023-11-13 19:06:54 +00:00
josh11b 109e7889dd Rename files to use abbreviations (#3389)
Reflects these recent PRs:
* #3375 
* #3382
2023-11-11 00:25:40 +00:00