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

test refactor that uses LayeredIdTable in sigmatch #24198

Closed
wants to merge 14 commits into from

Conversation

metagn
Copy link
Collaborator

@metagn metagn commented Sep 29, 2024

I think this is required for a good solution of #4858 but I'm not sure how it'll turn out, testing this by itself first.

There might be a performance hit because of the double pointer indirection. Edit: There is a little bit, I tried changing to object but setToPreviousLayer segfaulted in nimsuggest which uses --gc:markAndSweep, I can't find a workaround.

@metagn
Copy link
Collaborator Author

metagn commented Oct 3, 2024

Seems like it will work with some touch ups, opening separate PR for LayeredIdTable first to not complicate review. Edit: #24216

Araq pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 6, 2024
split from #24198

This is a required refactor for the only good solution I've been able to
think of for #4858 etc. Explanation:

---

`sigmatch` currently [disables
bindings](https://github.com/nim-lang/Nim/blob/d6a71a10671b66ee4f5be09f99234b3d834e7fce/compiler/sigmatch.nim#L1956)
(except for binding to other generic parameters) when matching against
constraints of generic parameters. This is so when the constraint is a
general metatype like `seq`, the type matching will not treat all
following uses of `seq` as the type matched against that generic
parameter.

However to solve #4858 etc we need to bind `or` types with a conversion
match to the type they are supposed to be converted to (i.e. matching
`int literal(123)` against `int8 | int16` should bind `int8`[^1], not
`int`). The generic parameter constraint binding needs some way to keep
track of this so that matching `int literal(123)` against `T: int8 |
int16` also binds `T` to `int8`[^1].

The only good way to do this IMO is to generate a new "binding context"
when matching against constraints, then binding the generic param to
what the constraint was bound to in that context (in #24198 this is
restricted to just `or` types & concrete types with convertible matches,
it doesn't work in general).

---

`semtypinst` already does something similar for bindings of generic
invocations using `LayeredIdTable`, so `LayeredIdTable` is now split
into its own module and used in `sigmatch` for type bindings as well,
rather than a single-layer `TypeMapping`. Other modules which act on
`sigmatch`'s binding map are also updated to use this type instead.

The type is also made into an `object` type rather than a `ref object`
to reduce the pointer indirection when embedding it inside
`TCandidate`/`TReplTypeVars`, but only on arc/orc since there are some
weird aliasing bugs on refc/markAndSweep that cause a segfault when
setting a layer to its previous layer. If we want we can also just
remove the conditional compilation altogether and always use `ref
object` at the cost of some performance.

[^1]: `int8` binding here and not `int16` might seem weird, since they
match equally well. But we need to resolve the ambiguity here, in #24012
I tested disallowing ambiguities like this and it broke many packages
that tries to match int literals to things like `int16 | uint16` or
`int8 | int16`. Instead of making these packages stop working I think
it's better we resolve the ambiguity with a rule like "the earliest `or`
branch with the best match, matches". This is the rule used in #24198.
@Araq Araq closed this Oct 6, 2024
metagn added a commit to metagn/Nim that referenced this pull request Oct 7, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants