[5/n] rustc: record the target type of every adjustment. by eddyb · Pull Request #37408 · rust-lang/rust

eddyb · 2016-10-25T18:58:55Z

This is part of a series (prev | next) of patches designed to rework rustc into an out-of-order on-demand pipeline model for both better feature support (e.g. MIR-based early constant evaluation) and incremental execution of compiler passes (e.g. type-checking), with beneficial consequences to IDE support as well.
If any motivation is unclear, please ask for additional PR description clarifications or code comments.

The first commit rearranges tcx.tables so that all users go through tcx.tables(). This in preparation for per-body Tables where they will be requested for a specific DefId. Included to minimize churn.

The rest of the changes focus on adjustments, there are some renamings, but the main addition is the target type, always available in all cases (as opposed to just for unsizing where it was previously needed).

Possibly the most significant effect of this change is that figuring out the final type of an expression is now always just one successful HashMap lookup (either the adjustment or, if that doesn't exist, the node type).

rust-highfive · 2016-10-25T18:59:08Z

r? @nikomatsakis

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

bors · 2016-10-26T14:02:33Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #37270) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

bors · 2016-10-27T04:49:01Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #36695) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

bors · 2016-10-29T22:30:01Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #37389) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

nikomatsakis · 2016-10-31T15:48:59Z

r=me

eddyb · 2016-11-02T02:20:23Z

@bors r=nikomatsakis

bors · 2016-11-02T02:20:24Z

📌 Commit 0d7201e has been approved by nikomatsakis

bors · 2016-11-03T13:15:40Z

⌛ Testing commit 0d7201e with merge 09f94eb...

bors · 2016-11-03T13:19:47Z

💔 Test failed - auto-win-gnu-32-opt-rustbuild

alexcrichton · 2016-11-03T15:51:00Z

@bors: retry

[5/n] rustc: record the target type of every adjustment. _This is part of a series ([prev](rust-lang#37404) | [next](rust-lang#37412)) of patches designed to rework rustc into an out-of-order on-demand pipeline model for both better feature support (e.g. [MIR-based](https://github.com/solson/miri) early constant evaluation) and incremental execution of compiler passes (e.g. type-checking), with beneficial consequences to IDE support as well. If any motivation is unclear, please ask for additional PR description clarifications or code comments._ <hr> The first commit rearranges `tcx.tables` so that all users go through `tcx.tables()`. This in preparation for per-body `Tables` where they will be requested for a specific `DefId`. Included to minimize churn. The rest of the changes focus on adjustments, there are some renamings, but the main addition is the target type, always available in all cases (as opposed to just for unsizing where it was previously needed). Possibly the most significant effect of this change is that figuring out the final type of an expression is now _always_ just one successful `HashMap` lookup (either the adjustment or, if that doesn't exist, the node type).

bors · 2016-11-05T00:38:54Z

⌛ Testing commit 0d7201e with merge d3b3b20...

bors · 2016-11-05T00:43:54Z

💔 Test failed - auto-win-gnu-32-opt-rustbuild

alexcrichton · 2016-11-05T00:53:51Z

@bors: retry

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 5:43 PM, bors notifications@github.com wrote:

💔 Test failed - auto-win-gnu-32-opt-rustbuild
https://buildbot.rust-lang.org/builders/auto-win-gnu-32-opt-rustbuild/builds/2926
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#37408 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAD95K3E-97LW8oOIi9FB_nEzsRJURJaks5q69FMgaJpZM4KgW57
.

bors · 2016-11-05T04:32:42Z

⌛ Testing commit 0d7201e with merge 6c1c47f...

bors · 2016-11-05T04:37:12Z

⛄ The build was interrupted to prioritize another pull request.

bors · 2016-11-05T04:56:18Z

⌛ Testing commit 0d7201e with merge be724fc...

bors · 2016-11-05T04:58:04Z

⛄ The build was interrupted to prioritize another pull request.

bors · 2016-11-05T05:16:57Z

⌛ Testing commit 0d7201e with merge 884c93a...

bors · 2016-11-05T05:19:36Z

💔 Test failed - auto-win-msvc-64-opt-rustbuild

alexcrichton · 2016-11-05T05:38:51Z

@bors: retry

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 10:19 PM, bors notifications@github.com wrote:

💔 Test failed - auto-win-msvc-64-opt-rustbuild
https://buildbot.rust-lang.org/builders/auto-win-msvc-64-opt-rustbuild/builds/2923
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#37408 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAD95M5YPXS9DBPTJofJWbk3_myjpVNqks5q7BHrgaJpZM4KgW57
.

bors · 2016-11-05T05:57:07Z

⌛ Testing commit 0d7201e with merge dce5eca...

bors · 2016-11-05T06:01:15Z

💔 Test failed - auto-win-gnu-32-opt

Rollup of 24 pull requests - Successful merges: #37255, #37317, #37408, #37410, #37422, #37427, #37470, #37501, #37537, #37556, #37557, #37564, #37565, #37566, #37569, #37574, #37577, #37579, #37583, #37585, #37586, #37587, #37589, #37596 - Failed merges: #37521, #37547

[4/n] rustc: harden against InferOk having obligations in more cases. _This is part of a series ([prev](#37402) | [next](#37408)) of patches designed to rework rustc into an out-of-order on-demand pipeline model for both better feature support (e.g. [MIR-based](https://github.com/solson/miri) early constant evaluation) and incremental execution of compiler passes (e.g. type-checking), with beneficial consequences to IDE support as well. If any motivation is unclear, please ask for additional PR description clarifications or code comments._ <hr> This adds more asserts that `InferOk` results have no obligations, pending completion of #32730. Each of these could accidentally drop obligations on the floor if they start getting produced by unification, and a future change does just that, in order to produce a "shallow success" (hopefully leading to ambiguities during trait selection), _without_ the possibility of an eventual success - mostly guarded by ICEs for now.

@Manishearth

[6/n] rustc: transition HIR function bodies from Block to Expr. _This is part of a series ([prev](rust-lang#37408) | [next](rust-lang#37676)) of patches designed to rework rustc into an out-of-order on-demand pipeline model for both better feature support (e.g. [MIR-based](https://github.com/solson/miri) early constant evaluation) and incremental execution of compiler passes (e.g. type-checking), with beneficial consequences to IDE support as well. If any motivation is unclear, please ask for additional PR description clarifications or code comments._ <hr> The main change here is that functions and closures both use `Expr` instead of `Block` for their bodies. For closures this actually allows a honest representation of brace-less closure bodies, e.g. `|x| x + 1` is now distinguishable from `|x| { x + 1 }`, therefore this PR is `[syntax-breaking]` (cc @Manishearth). Using `Expr` allows more logic to be shared between constant bodies and function bodies, with some small such changes already part of this PR, and eventually easing rust-lang#35078 and per-body type tables. Incidentally, there used to be some corners cut here and there and as such I had to (re)write divergence tracking for type-checking so that it is capable of understanding basic structured control-flow: ``` rust fn a(x: bool) -> i32 { // match also works (as long as all arms diverge) if x { panic!("true") } else { return 1; } 0 // "unreachable expression" after this PR } ``` And since liveness' "not all control paths return a value" moved to type-checking we can have nice things: ``` rust // before & after: fn b() -> i32 { 0; } // help: consider removing this semicolon // only after this PR fn c() -> i32 { { 0; } } // help: consider removing this semicolon fn d() { let x: i32 = { 0; }; } // help: consider removing this semicolon fn e() { f({ 0; }); } // help: consider removing this semicolon ```

rust-highfive assigned nikomatsakis Oct 25, 2016

eddyb mentioned this pull request Oct 25, 2016
[4/n] rustc: harden against InferOk having obligations in more cases. #37404
Merged

eddyb force-pushed the lazy-5 branch 2 times, most recently from 0595cca to f1e7983Compare October 25, 2016 23:12

eddyb mentioned this pull request Oct 26, 2016
[6/n] rustc: transition HIR function bodies from Block to Expr. #37412
Merged

eddyb force-pushed the lazy-5 branch 2 times, most recently from 8eb737b to 89a28f6Compare October 27, 2016 01:52

eddyb force-pushed the lazy-5 branch from 89a28f6 to 4ad9485Compare October 28, 2016 08:45

eddyb added 2 commits November 2, 2016 03:50

rustc: make all read access to tcx.tables go through a method.
6a8d131

rustc: record the target type of every adjustment.
0d7201e

eddyb force-pushed the lazy-5 branch from 4ad9485 to 0d7201eCompare November 2, 2016 02:06

sophiajt mentioned this pull request Nov 4, 2016
Rollup of 17 pull requests #37581
Closed

alexcrichton mentioned this pull request Nov 4, 2016
Rollup of 24 pull requests #37597
Merged

bors merged commit 0d7201e into rust-lang:masterNov 6, 2016

eddyb deleted the lazy-5 branch November 9, 2016 16:51

mcarton mentioned this pull request Nov 16, 2016
Rustup to rustc 1.15.0-nightly (0ed951993 2016-11-14) and bump to 0.0.99 rust-lang/rust-clippy#1344
Merged

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Conversation

eddyb commented Oct 25, 2016• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rust-highfive commented Oct 25, 2016

Uh oh!

bors commented Oct 26, 2016

Uh oh!

bors commented Oct 27, 2016

Uh oh!

bors commented Oct 29, 2016

Uh oh!

nikomatsakis commented Oct 31, 2016

Uh oh!

eddyb commented Nov 2, 2016

Uh oh!

bors commented Nov 2, 2016

Uh oh!

bors commented Nov 3, 2016

Uh oh!

bors commented Nov 3, 2016

Uh oh!

alexcrichton commented Nov 3, 2016

Uh oh!

bors commented Nov 5, 2016

Uh oh!

bors commented Nov 5, 2016

Uh oh!

alexcrichton commented Nov 5, 2016

Uh oh!

bors commented Nov 5, 2016

Uh oh!

bors commented Nov 5, 2016

Uh oh!

bors commented Nov 5, 2016

Uh oh!

bors commented Nov 5, 2016

Uh oh!

bors commented Nov 5, 2016

Uh oh!

bors commented Nov 5, 2016

Uh oh!

alexcrichton commented Nov 5, 2016

Uh oh!

bors commented Nov 5, 2016

Uh oh!

bors commented Nov 5, 2016

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

eddyb commented Oct 25, 2016•
edited
Loading