Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

treat generic proc param/return type like generic type body #23194

Closed
wants to merge 9 commits into from

Conversation

metagn
Copy link
Collaborator

@metagn metagn commented Jan 9, 2024

fixes #4228, fixes #7006, fixes #7008, fixes #8406, fixes #8551, fixes #11112, fixes #20027, fixes #22647 (maybe not entirely by the end, N * 2 needs the tyStatic change which might cause problems), refs #8545, refs #22607

@metagn
Copy link
Collaborator Author

metagn commented Jan 10, 2024

The (or just one) issue is that unresolved single expressions like T.bits are assumed to be types when not in a range context and not static values. They should probably be interchangeable. Maybe we can do this by always producing nkStaticExpr then treating it as a type if it evaluates to typedesc.

Edit: The issue was sigmatch was converting a tyFromExpr node to an nkStaticExpr with type tyStatic when attempting to fitNode to a parameter with a static constraint. But semtypinst completely ignores all tyStatic, so tyFromExpr has the correct behavior. It already handles the value/type dichotomy via tyTypeDesc.

Araq pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 26, 2024
…n fixes (#24005)

fixes #4228, fixes #4990, fixes #7006, fixes #7008, fixes #8406, fixes
#8551, fixes #11112, fixes #20027, fixes #22647, refs #23854 and #23855
(remaining issue fixed), refs #8545 (works properly now with
`cast[static[bool]]` changed to `cast[bool]`), refs #22342 and #22607
(disabled tests added), succeeds #23194

Parameter and return type nodes in generic procs now undergo the same
`inGenericContext` treatment that nodes in generic type bodies do. This
allows many of the fixes in #22029 and followups to also apply to
generic proc signatures. Like #23983 however this needs some more
compiler fixes, but this time mostly in `sigmatch` and type
instantiations.

1. `tryReadingGenericParam` no longer treats `tyCompositeTypeClass` like
a concrete type anymore, so expressions like `Foo.T` where `Foo` is a
generic type don't look for a parameter of `Foo` in non-generic code
anymore. It also doesn't generate `tyFromExpr` in non-generic code for
any generic LHS. This is to handle a very specific case in `asyncmacro`
which used `FutureVar.astToStr` where `FutureVar` is generic.
2. The `tryResolvingStaticExpr` call when matching `tyFromExpr` in
sigmatch now doesn't consider call nodes in general unresolved, only
nodes with `tyFromExpr` type, which is emitted on unresolved expressions
by increasing `c.inGenericContext`. `c.inGenericContext == 0` is also
now required to attempt instantiating `tyFromExpr`. So matching against
`tyFromExpr` in proc signatures works in general now, but I'm
speculating it depends on constant folding in `semExpr` for statics to
match against it properly.
3. `paramTypesMatch` now doesn't try to change nodes with `tyFromExpr`
type into `tyStatic` type when fitting to a static type, because it
doesn't need to, they'll be handled the same way (this was a workaround
in place of the static type instantiation changes, only one of the
fields in the #22647 test doesn't work with it).
4. `tyStatic` matching now uses `inferStaticParam` instead of just range
type matching, so `Foo[N div 2]` can infer `N` in the same way `array[N
div 2, int]` can. `inferStaticParam` also disabled itself if the
inferred static param type already had a node, but `makeStaticExpr`
generates static types with unresolved nodes, so we only disable it if
it also doesn't have a binding. This might not work very well but the
static type instantiation changes should really lower the amount of
cases where it's encountered.
5. Static types now undergo type instantiation. Previously the branch
for `tyStatic` in `semtypinst` was a no-op, now it acts similarly to
instantiating any other type with the following differences:
- Other types only need instantiation if `containsGenericType` is true,
static types also get instantiated if their value node isn't a literal
node. Ideally any value node that is "already evaluated" should be
ignored, but I'm not sure of a better way to check this, maybe if
`evalConstExpr` emitted a flag. This is purely for optimization though.
- After instantiation, `semConstExpr` is called on the value node if
`not cl.allowMetaTypes` and the type isn't literally a `static` type.
Then the type of the node is set to the base type of the static type to
deal with `semConstExpr` stripping abstract types.
We need to do this because calls like `foo(N)` where `N` is `static int`
and `foo`'s first parameter is just `int` do not generate `tyFromExpr`,
they are fully typed and so `makeStaticExpr` is called on them, giving a
static type with an unresolved node.
@metagn metagn closed this Aug 26, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment