mu/072recipe.cc

617 lines
20 KiB
C++
Raw Normal View History

//: So far we've been calling a fixed recipe in each instruction, but we'd
//: also like to make the recipe a variable, pass recipes to "higher-order"
//: recipes, return recipes from recipes and so on.
:(scenario call_literal_recipe)
def main [
2016-09-17 17:28:25 +00:00
1:num <- call f, 34
]
2016-09-17 17:28:25 +00:00
def f x:num -> y:num [
local-scope
load-ingredients
y <- copy x
]
+mem: storing 34 in location 1
:(before "End Mu Types Initialization")
put(Type_ordinal, "recipe-literal", 0);
// 'recipe' variables can store recipe-literal
type_ordinal recipe = put(Type_ordinal, "recipe", Next_type_ordinal++);
get_or_insert(Type, recipe).name = "recipe";
:(after "Deduce Missing Type(x, caller)")
if (!x.type)
try_initialize_recipe_literal(x, caller);
:(before "Type Check in Type-ingredient-aware check_or_set_types_by_name")
if (!x.type)
try_initialize_recipe_literal(x, variant);
2016-08-25 17:26:21 +00:00
:(code)
void try_initialize_recipe_literal(reagent& x, const recipe& caller) {
if (x.type) return;
if (!contains_key(Recipe_ordinal, x.name)) return;
if (contains_reagent_with_non_recipe_literal_type(caller, x.name)) return;
2016-07-02 05:34:50 +00:00
x.type = new type_tree("recipe-literal");
x.set_value(get(Recipe_ordinal, x.name));
}
bool contains_reagent_with_non_recipe_literal_type(const recipe& caller, const string& name) {
2016-10-20 05:10:35 +00:00
for (int i = 0; i < SIZE(caller.steps); ++i) {
const instruction& inst = caller.steps.at(i);
2016-10-20 05:10:35 +00:00
for (int i = 0; i < SIZE(inst.ingredients); ++i)
if (is_matching_non_recipe_literal(inst.ingredients.at(i), name)) return true;
2016-10-20 05:10:35 +00:00
for (int i = 0; i < SIZE(inst.products); ++i)
if (is_matching_non_recipe_literal(inst.products.at(i), name)) return true;
}
return false;
}
bool is_matching_non_recipe_literal(const reagent& x, const string& name) {
if (x.name != name) return false;
if (!x.type) return false;
return !x.type->atom || x.type->name != "recipe-literal";
}
//: It's confusing to use variable names that are also recipe names. Always
//: assume variable types override recipe literals.
:(scenario error_on_recipe_literal_used_as_a_variable)
% Hide_errors = true;
def main [
local-scope
2016-09-17 07:46:03 +00:00
a:bool <- equal break 0
break:bool <- copy 0
]
2016-09-17 07:46:03 +00:00
+error: main: missing type for 'break' in 'a:bool <- equal break, 0'
:(before "End Primitive Recipe Declarations")
CALL,
:(before "End Primitive Recipe Numbers")
put(Recipe_ordinal, "call", CALL);
:(before "End Primitive Recipe Checks")
case CALL: {
if (inst.ingredients.empty()) {
2016-02-26 21:04:55 +00:00
raise << maybe(get(Recipe, r).name) << "'call' requires at least one ingredient (the recipe to call)\n" << end();
break;
}
if (!is_mu_recipe(inst.ingredients.at(0))) {
raise << maybe(get(Recipe, r).name) << "first ingredient of 'call' should be a recipe, but got '" << inst.ingredients.at(0).original_string << "'\n" << end();
break;
}
break;
}
:(before "End Primitive Recipe Implementations")
case CALL: {
// Begin Call
if (Trace_stream) {
++Trace_stream->callstack_depth;
trace("trace") << "indirect 'call': incrementing callstack depth to " << Trace_stream->callstack_depth << end();
assert(Trace_stream->callstack_depth < 9000); // 9998-101 plus cushion
}
if (!ingredients.at(0).at(0)) {
raise << maybe(current_recipe_name()) << "tried to call empty recipe in '" << to_string(current_instruction()) << "'" << end();
break;
}
const call& caller_frame = current_call();
instruction/*copy*/ call_instruction = to_instruction(caller_frame);
call_instruction.operation = ingredients.at(0).at(0);
call_instruction.ingredients.erase(call_instruction.ingredients.begin());
Current_routine->calls.push_front(call(ingredients.at(0).at(0)));
ingredients.erase(ingredients.begin()); // drop the callee
2016-10-21 00:39:00 +00:00
finish_call_housekeeping(call_instruction, ingredients);
// not done with caller
write_products = false;
fall_through_to_next_instruction = false;
break;
}
2017-12-07 18:53:42 +00:00
:(scenario call_variable)
def main [
{1: (recipe number -> number)} <- copy f
2:num <- call {1: (recipe number -> number)}, 34
]
def f x:num -> y:num [
local-scope
load-ingredients
y <- copy x
]
+mem: storing 34 in location 2
:(scenario call_literal_recipe_repeatedly)
def main [
1:num <- call f, 34
1:num <- call f, 35
]
def f x:num -> y:num [
local-scope
load-ingredients
y <- copy x
]
+mem: storing 34 in location 1
+mem: storing 35 in location 1
2017-12-07 18:53:42 +00:00
:(scenario call_shape_shifting_recipe)
def main [
1:num <- call f, 34
]
def f x:_elem -> y:_elem [
local-scope
load-ingredients
y <- copy x
]
+mem: storing 34 in location 1
:(scenario call_shape_shifting_recipe_inside_shape_shifting_recipe)
def main [
1:num <- f 34
]
def f x:_elem -> y:_elem [
local-scope
load-ingredients
y <- call g x
]
def g x:_elem -> y:_elem [
local-scope
load-ingredients
y <- copy x
]
+mem: storing 34 in location 1
:(scenario call_shape_shifting_recipe_repeatedly_inside_shape_shifting_recipe)
def main [
1:num <- f 34
]
def f x:_elem -> y:_elem [
local-scope
load-ingredients
y <- call g x
y <- call g x
]
def g x:_elem -> y:_elem [
local-scope
load-ingredients
y <- copy x
]
+mem: storing 34 in location 1
//:: check types for 'call' instructions
:(scenario call_check_literal_recipe)
% Hide_errors = true;
def main [
2016-09-17 17:28:25 +00:00
1:num <- call f, 34
]
def f x:point -> y:point [
local-scope
load-ingredients
y <- copy x
]
2016-09-17 17:28:25 +00:00
+error: main: ingredient 0 has the wrong type at '1:num <- call f, 34'
+error: main: product 0 has the wrong type at '1:num <- call f, 34'
:(scenario call_check_variable_recipe)
% Hide_errors = true;
def main [
{1: (recipe point -> point)} <- copy f
2016-09-17 17:28:25 +00:00
2:num <- call {1: (recipe point -> point)}, 34
]
def f x:point -> y:point [
local-scope
load-ingredients
y <- copy x
]
2016-09-17 17:28:25 +00:00
+error: main: ingredient 0 has the wrong type at '2:num <- call {1: (recipe point -> point)}, 34'
+error: main: product 0 has the wrong type at '2:num <- call {1: (recipe point -> point)}, 34'
:(before "End resolve_ambiguous_call(r, index, inst, caller_recipe) Special-cases")
if (inst.name == "call" && !inst.ingredients.empty() && is_recipe_literal(inst.ingredients.at(0))) {
resolve_indirect_ambiguous_call(r, index, inst, caller_recipe);
return;
}
:(code)
bool is_recipe_literal(const reagent& x) {
return x.type && x.type->atom && x.type->name == "recipe-literal";
}
void resolve_indirect_ambiguous_call(const recipe_ordinal r, int index, instruction& inst, const recipe& caller_recipe) {
instruction inst2;
inst2.name = inst.ingredients.at(0).name;
for (int i = /*skip recipe*/1; i < SIZE(inst.ingredients); ++i)
inst2.ingredients.push_back(inst.ingredients.at(i));
for (int i = 0; i < SIZE(inst.products); ++i)
inst2.products.push_back(inst.products.at(i));
resolve_ambiguous_call(r, index, inst2, caller_recipe);
inst.ingredients.at(0).name = inst2.name;
inst.ingredients.at(0).set_value(get(Recipe_ordinal, inst2.name));
}
:(after "Transform.push_back(check_instruction)")
Transform.push_back(check_indirect_calls_against_header); // idempotent
2015-10-07 07:22:49 +00:00
:(code)
void check_indirect_calls_against_header(const recipe_ordinal r) {
trace(9991, "transform") << "--- type-check 'call' instructions inside recipe " << get(Recipe, r).name << end();
const recipe& caller = get(Recipe, r);
2016-10-20 05:10:35 +00:00
for (int i = 0; i < SIZE(caller.steps); ++i) {
const instruction& inst = caller.steps.at(i);
if (!is_indirect_call(inst.operation)) continue;
if (inst.ingredients.empty()) continue; // error raised above
const reagent& callee = inst.ingredients.at(0);
if (!is_mu_recipe(callee)) continue; // error raised above
const recipe callee_header = is_literal(callee) ? get(Recipe, callee.value) : from_reagent(inst.ingredients.at(0));
if (!callee_header.has_header) continue;
if (is_indirect_call_with_ingredients(inst.operation)) {
for (long int i = /*skip callee*/1; i < min(SIZE(inst.ingredients), SIZE(callee_header.ingredients)+/*skip callee*/1); ++i) {
if (!types_coercible(callee_header.ingredients.at(i-/*skip callee*/1), inst.ingredients.at(i)))
2017-05-26 23:43:18 +00:00
raise << maybe(caller.name) << "ingredient " << i-/*skip callee*/1 << " has the wrong type at '" << to_original_string(inst) << "'\n" << end();
}
}
if (is_indirect_call_with_products(inst.operation)) {
for (long int i = 0; i < min(SIZE(inst.products), SIZE(callee_header.products)); ++i) {
if (is_dummy(inst.products.at(i))) continue;
if (!types_coercible(callee_header.products.at(i), inst.products.at(i)))
2017-05-26 23:43:18 +00:00
raise << maybe(caller.name) << "product " << i << " has the wrong type at '" << to_original_string(inst) << "'\n" << end();
}
}
}
}
bool is_indirect_call(const recipe_ordinal r) {
return is_indirect_call_with_ingredients(r) || is_indirect_call_with_products(r);
}
bool is_indirect_call_with_ingredients(const recipe_ordinal r) {
if (r == CALL) return true;
// End is_indirect_call_with_ingredients Special-cases
return false;
}
bool is_indirect_call_with_products(const recipe_ordinal r) {
if (r == CALL) return true;
// End is_indirect_call_with_products Special-cases
return false;
}
recipe from_reagent(const reagent& r) {
2016-09-10 19:55:21 +00:00
assert(r.type);
recipe result_header; // will contain only ingredients and products, nothing else
result_header.has_header = true;
// Begin Reagent->Recipe(r, recipe_header)
2016-09-10 19:55:21 +00:00
if (r.type->atom) {
assert(r.type->name == "recipe");
return result_header;
}
const type_tree* root_type = r.type->atom ? r.type : r.type->left;
assert(root_type->atom);
assert(root_type->name == "recipe");
const type_tree* curr = r.type->right;
2016-10-20 05:10:35 +00:00
for (/*nada*/; curr && !curr->atom; curr = curr->right) {
3309 Rip out everything to fix one failing unit test (commit 3290; type abbreviations). This commit does several things at once that I couldn't come up with a clean way to unpack: A. It moves to a new representation for type trees without changing the actual definition of the `type_tree` struct. B. It adds unit tests for our type metadata precomputation, so that errors there show up early and in a simpler setting rather than dying when we try to load Mu code. C. It fixes a bug, guarding against infinite loops when precomputing metadata for recursive shape-shifting containers. To do this it uses a dumb way of comparing type_trees, comparing their string representations instead. That is likely incredibly inefficient. Perhaps due to C, this commit has made Mu incredibly slow. Running all tests for the core and the edit/ app now takes 6.5 minutes rather than 3.5 minutes. == more notes and details I've been struggling for the past week now to back out of a bad design decision, a premature optimization from the early days: storing atoms directly in the 'value' slot of a cons cell rather than creating a special 'atom' cons cell and storing it on the 'left' slot. In other words, if a cons cell looks like this: o / | \ left val right ..then the type_tree (a b c) used to look like this (before this commit): o | \ a o | \ b o | \ c null ..rather than like this 'classic' approach to s-expressions which never mixes val and right (which is what we now have): o / \ o o | / \ a o o | / \ b o null | c The old approach made several operations more complicated, most recently the act of replacing a (possibly atom/leaf) sub-tree with another. That was the final straw that got me to realize the contortions I was going through to save a few type_tree nodes (cons cells). Switching to the new approach was hard partly because I've been using the old approach for so long and type_tree manipulations had pervaded everything. Another issue I ran into was the realization that my layers were not cleanly separated. Key parts of early layers (precomputing type metadata) existed purely for far later ones (shape-shifting types). Layers I got repeatedly stuck at: 1. the transform for precomputing type sizes (layer 30) 2. type-checks on merge instructions (layer 31) 3. the transform for precomputing address offsets in types (layer 36) 4. replace operations in supporting shape-shifting recipes (layer 55) After much thrashing I finally noticed that it wasn't the entirety of these layers that was giving me trouble, but just the type metadata precomputation, which had bugs that weren't manifesting until 30 layers later. Or, worse, when loading .mu files before any tests had had a chance to run. A common failure mode was running into types at run time that I hadn't precomputed metadata for at transform time. Digging into these bugs got me to realize that what I had before wasn't really very good, but a half-assed heuristic approach that did a whole lot of extra work precomputing metadata for utterly meaningless types like `((address number) 3)` which just happened to be part of a larger type like `(array (address number) 3)`. So, I redid it all. I switched the representation of types (because the old representation made unit tests difficult to retrofit) and added unit tests to the metadata precomputation. I also made layer 30 only do the minimal metadata precomputation it needs for the concepts introduced until then. In the process, I also made the precomputation more correct than before, and added hooks in the right place so that I could augment the logic when I introduced shape-shifting containers. == lessons learned There's several levels of hygiene when it comes to layers: 1. Every layer introduces precisely what it needs and in the simplest way possible. If I was building an app until just that layer, nothing would seem over-engineered. 2. Some layers are fore-shadowing features in future layers. Sometimes this is ok. For example, layer 10 foreshadows containers and arrays and so on without actually supporting them. That is a net win because it lets me lay out the core of Mu's data structures out in one place. But if the fore-shadowing gets too complex things get nasty. Not least because it can be hard to write unit tests for features before you provide the plumbing to visualize and manipulate them. 3. A layer is introducing features that are tested only in later layers. 4. A layer is introducing features with tests that are invalidated in later layers. (This I knew from early on to be an obviously horrendous idea.) Summary: avoid Level 2 (foreshadowing layers) as much as possible. Tolerate it indefinitely for small things where the code stays simple over time, but become strict again when things start to get more complex. Level 3 is mostly a net lose, but sometimes it can be expedient (a real case of the usually grossly over-applied term "technical debt"), and it's better than the conventional baseline of no layers and no scenarios. Just clean it up as soon as possible. Definitely avoid layer 4 at any time. == minor lessons Avoid unit tests for trivial things, write scenarios in context as much as possible. But within those margins unit tests are fine. Just introduce them before any scenarios (commit 3297). Reorganizing layers can be easy. Just merge layers for starters! Punt on resplitting them in some new way until you've gotten them to work. This is the wisdom of Refactoring: small steps. What made it hard was not wanting to merge *everything* between layer 30 and 55. The eventual insight was realizing I just need to move those two full-strength transforms and nothing else.
2016-09-10 01:32:52 +00:00
if (curr->left->atom && curr->left->name == "->") {
curr = curr->right; // skip delimiter
2016-09-10 23:16:15 +00:00
goto read_products;
}
3309 Rip out everything to fix one failing unit test (commit 3290; type abbreviations). This commit does several things at once that I couldn't come up with a clean way to unpack: A. It moves to a new representation for type trees without changing the actual definition of the `type_tree` struct. B. It adds unit tests for our type metadata precomputation, so that errors there show up early and in a simpler setting rather than dying when we try to load Mu code. C. It fixes a bug, guarding against infinite loops when precomputing metadata for recursive shape-shifting containers. To do this it uses a dumb way of comparing type_trees, comparing their string representations instead. That is likely incredibly inefficient. Perhaps due to C, this commit has made Mu incredibly slow. Running all tests for the core and the edit/ app now takes 6.5 minutes rather than 3.5 minutes. == more notes and details I've been struggling for the past week now to back out of a bad design decision, a premature optimization from the early days: storing atoms directly in the 'value' slot of a cons cell rather than creating a special 'atom' cons cell and storing it on the 'left' slot. In other words, if a cons cell looks like this: o / | \ left val right ..then the type_tree (a b c) used to look like this (before this commit): o | \ a o | \ b o | \ c null ..rather than like this 'classic' approach to s-expressions which never mixes val and right (which is what we now have): o / \ o o | / \ a o o | / \ b o null | c The old approach made several operations more complicated, most recently the act of replacing a (possibly atom/leaf) sub-tree with another. That was the final straw that got me to realize the contortions I was going through to save a few type_tree nodes (cons cells). Switching to the new approach was hard partly because I've been using the old approach for so long and type_tree manipulations had pervaded everything. Another issue I ran into was the realization that my layers were not cleanly separated. Key parts of early layers (precomputing type metadata) existed purely for far later ones (shape-shifting types). Layers I got repeatedly stuck at: 1. the transform for precomputing type sizes (layer 30) 2. type-checks on merge instructions (layer 31) 3. the transform for precomputing address offsets in types (layer 36) 4. replace operations in supporting shape-shifting recipes (layer 55) After much thrashing I finally noticed that it wasn't the entirety of these layers that was giving me trouble, but just the type metadata precomputation, which had bugs that weren't manifesting until 30 layers later. Or, worse, when loading .mu files before any tests had had a chance to run. A common failure mode was running into types at run time that I hadn't precomputed metadata for at transform time. Digging into these bugs got me to realize that what I had before wasn't really very good, but a half-assed heuristic approach that did a whole lot of extra work precomputing metadata for utterly meaningless types like `((address number) 3)` which just happened to be part of a larger type like `(array (address number) 3)`. So, I redid it all. I switched the representation of types (because the old representation made unit tests difficult to retrofit) and added unit tests to the metadata precomputation. I also made layer 30 only do the minimal metadata precomputation it needs for the concepts introduced until then. In the process, I also made the precomputation more correct than before, and added hooks in the right place so that I could augment the logic when I introduced shape-shifting containers. == lessons learned There's several levels of hygiene when it comes to layers: 1. Every layer introduces precisely what it needs and in the simplest way possible. If I was building an app until just that layer, nothing would seem over-engineered. 2. Some layers are fore-shadowing features in future layers. Sometimes this is ok. For example, layer 10 foreshadows containers and arrays and so on without actually supporting them. That is a net win because it lets me lay out the core of Mu's data structures out in one place. But if the fore-shadowing gets too complex things get nasty. Not least because it can be hard to write unit tests for features before you provide the plumbing to visualize and manipulate them. 3. A layer is introducing features that are tested only in later layers. 4. A layer is introducing features with tests that are invalidated in later layers. (This I knew from early on to be an obviously horrendous idea.) Summary: avoid Level 2 (foreshadowing layers) as much as possible. Tolerate it indefinitely for small things where the code stays simple over time, but become strict again when things start to get more complex. Level 3 is mostly a net lose, but sometimes it can be expedient (a real case of the usually grossly over-applied term "technical debt"), and it's better than the conventional baseline of no layers and no scenarios. Just clean it up as soon as possible. Definitely avoid layer 4 at any time. == minor lessons Avoid unit tests for trivial things, write scenarios in context as much as possible. But within those margins unit tests are fine. Just introduce them before any scenarios (commit 3297). Reorganizing layers can be easy. Just merge layers for starters! Punt on resplitting them in some new way until you've gotten them to work. This is the wisdom of Refactoring: small steps. What made it hard was not wanting to merge *everything* between layer 30 and 55. The eventual insight was realizing I just need to move those two full-strength transforms and nothing else.
2016-09-10 01:32:52 +00:00
result_header.ingredients.push_back(next_recipe_reagent(curr->left));
}
2016-09-10 23:16:15 +00:00
if (curr) {
assert(curr->atom);
result_header.ingredients.push_back(next_recipe_reagent(curr));
return result_header; // no products
}
read_products:
2016-10-20 05:10:35 +00:00
for (/*nada*/; curr && !curr->atom; curr = curr->right)
3309 Rip out everything to fix one failing unit test (commit 3290; type abbreviations). This commit does several things at once that I couldn't come up with a clean way to unpack: A. It moves to a new representation for type trees without changing the actual definition of the `type_tree` struct. B. It adds unit tests for our type metadata precomputation, so that errors there show up early and in a simpler setting rather than dying when we try to load Mu code. C. It fixes a bug, guarding against infinite loops when precomputing metadata for recursive shape-shifting containers. To do this it uses a dumb way of comparing type_trees, comparing their string representations instead. That is likely incredibly inefficient. Perhaps due to C, this commit has made Mu incredibly slow. Running all tests for the core and the edit/ app now takes 6.5 minutes rather than 3.5 minutes. == more notes and details I've been struggling for the past week now to back out of a bad design decision, a premature optimization from the early days: storing atoms directly in the 'value' slot of a cons cell rather than creating a special 'atom' cons cell and storing it on the 'left' slot. In other words, if a cons cell looks like this: o / | \ left val right ..then the type_tree (a b c) used to look like this (before this commit): o | \ a o | \ b o | \ c null ..rather than like this 'classic' approach to s-expressions which never mixes val and right (which is what we now have): o / \ o o | / \ a o o | / \ b o null | c The old approach made several operations more complicated, most recently the act of replacing a (possibly atom/leaf) sub-tree with another. That was the final straw that got me to realize the contortions I was going through to save a few type_tree nodes (cons cells). Switching to the new approach was hard partly because I've been using the old approach for so long and type_tree manipulations had pervaded everything. Another issue I ran into was the realization that my layers were not cleanly separated. Key parts of early layers (precomputing type metadata) existed purely for far later ones (shape-shifting types). Layers I got repeatedly stuck at: 1. the transform for precomputing type sizes (layer 30) 2. type-checks on merge instructions (layer 31) 3. the transform for precomputing address offsets in types (layer 36) 4. replace operations in supporting shape-shifting recipes (layer 55) After much thrashing I finally noticed that it wasn't the entirety of these layers that was giving me trouble, but just the type metadata precomputation, which had bugs that weren't manifesting until 30 layers later. Or, worse, when loading .mu files before any tests had had a chance to run. A common failure mode was running into types at run time that I hadn't precomputed metadata for at transform time. Digging into these bugs got me to realize that what I had before wasn't really very good, but a half-assed heuristic approach that did a whole lot of extra work precomputing metadata for utterly meaningless types like `((address number) 3)` which just happened to be part of a larger type like `(array (address number) 3)`. So, I redid it all. I switched the representation of types (because the old representation made unit tests difficult to retrofit) and added unit tests to the metadata precomputation. I also made layer 30 only do the minimal metadata precomputation it needs for the concepts introduced until then. In the process, I also made the precomputation more correct than before, and added hooks in the right place so that I could augment the logic when I introduced shape-shifting containers. == lessons learned There's several levels of hygiene when it comes to layers: 1. Every layer introduces precisely what it needs and in the simplest way possible. If I was building an app until just that layer, nothing would seem over-engineered. 2. Some layers are fore-shadowing features in future layers. Sometimes this is ok. For example, layer 10 foreshadows containers and arrays and so on without actually supporting them. That is a net win because it lets me lay out the core of Mu's data structures out in one place. But if the fore-shadowing gets too complex things get nasty. Not least because it can be hard to write unit tests for features before you provide the plumbing to visualize and manipulate them. 3. A layer is introducing features that are tested only in later layers. 4. A layer is introducing features with tests that are invalidated in later layers. (This I knew from early on to be an obviously horrendous idea.) Summary: avoid Level 2 (foreshadowing layers) as much as possible. Tolerate it indefinitely for small things where the code stays simple over time, but become strict again when things start to get more complex. Level 3 is mostly a net lose, but sometimes it can be expedient (a real case of the usually grossly over-applied term "technical debt"), and it's better than the conventional baseline of no layers and no scenarios. Just clean it up as soon as possible. Definitely avoid layer 4 at any time. == minor lessons Avoid unit tests for trivial things, write scenarios in context as much as possible. But within those margins unit tests are fine. Just introduce them before any scenarios (commit 3297). Reorganizing layers can be easy. Just merge layers for starters! Punt on resplitting them in some new way until you've gotten them to work. This is the wisdom of Refactoring: small steps. What made it hard was not wanting to merge *everything* between layer 30 and 55. The eventual insight was realizing I just need to move those two full-strength transforms and nothing else.
2016-09-10 01:32:52 +00:00
result_header.products.push_back(next_recipe_reagent(curr->left));
if (curr) {
assert(curr->atom);
2016-06-12 07:10:32 +00:00
result_header.products.push_back(next_recipe_reagent(curr));
3309 Rip out everything to fix one failing unit test (commit 3290; type abbreviations). This commit does several things at once that I couldn't come up with a clean way to unpack: A. It moves to a new representation for type trees without changing the actual definition of the `type_tree` struct. B. It adds unit tests for our type metadata precomputation, so that errors there show up early and in a simpler setting rather than dying when we try to load Mu code. C. It fixes a bug, guarding against infinite loops when precomputing metadata for recursive shape-shifting containers. To do this it uses a dumb way of comparing type_trees, comparing their string representations instead. That is likely incredibly inefficient. Perhaps due to C, this commit has made Mu incredibly slow. Running all tests for the core and the edit/ app now takes 6.5 minutes rather than 3.5 minutes. == more notes and details I've been struggling for the past week now to back out of a bad design decision, a premature optimization from the early days: storing atoms directly in the 'value' slot of a cons cell rather than creating a special 'atom' cons cell and storing it on the 'left' slot. In other words, if a cons cell looks like this: o / | \ left val right ..then the type_tree (a b c) used to look like this (before this commit): o | \ a o | \ b o | \ c null ..rather than like this 'classic' approach to s-expressions which never mixes val and right (which is what we now have): o / \ o o | / \ a o o | / \ b o null | c The old approach made several operations more complicated, most recently the act of replacing a (possibly atom/leaf) sub-tree with another. That was the final straw that got me to realize the contortions I was going through to save a few type_tree nodes (cons cells). Switching to the new approach was hard partly because I've been using the old approach for so long and type_tree manipulations had pervaded everything. Another issue I ran into was the realization that my layers were not cleanly separated. Key parts of early layers (precomputing type metadata) existed purely for far later ones (shape-shifting types). Layers I got repeatedly stuck at: 1. the transform for precomputing type sizes (layer 30) 2. type-checks on merge instructions (layer 31) 3. the transform for precomputing address offsets in types (layer 36) 4. replace operations in supporting shape-shifting recipes (layer 55) After much thrashing I finally noticed that it wasn't the entirety of these layers that was giving me trouble, but just the type metadata precomputation, which had bugs that weren't manifesting until 30 layers later. Or, worse, when loading .mu files before any tests had had a chance to run. A common failure mode was running into types at run time that I hadn't precomputed metadata for at transform time. Digging into these bugs got me to realize that what I had before wasn't really very good, but a half-assed heuristic approach that did a whole lot of extra work precomputing metadata for utterly meaningless types like `((address number) 3)` which just happened to be part of a larger type like `(array (address number) 3)`. So, I redid it all. I switched the representation of types (because the old representation made unit tests difficult to retrofit) and added unit tests to the metadata precomputation. I also made layer 30 only do the minimal metadata precomputation it needs for the concepts introduced until then. In the process, I also made the precomputation more correct than before, and added hooks in the right place so that I could augment the logic when I introduced shape-shifting containers. == lessons learned There's several levels of hygiene when it comes to layers: 1. Every layer introduces precisely what it needs and in the simplest way possible. If I was building an app until just that layer, nothing would seem over-engineered. 2. Some layers are fore-shadowing features in future layers. Sometimes this is ok. For example, layer 10 foreshadows containers and arrays and so on without actually supporting them. That is a net win because it lets me lay out the core of Mu's data structures out in one place. But if the fore-shadowing gets too complex things get nasty. Not least because it can be hard to write unit tests for features before you provide the plumbing to visualize and manipulate them. 3. A layer is introducing features that are tested only in later layers. 4. A layer is introducing features with tests that are invalidated in later layers. (This I knew from early on to be an obviously horrendous idea.) Summary: avoid Level 2 (foreshadowing layers) as much as possible. Tolerate it indefinitely for small things where the code stays simple over time, but become strict again when things start to get more complex. Level 3 is mostly a net lose, but sometimes it can be expedient (a real case of the usually grossly over-applied term "technical debt"), and it's better than the conventional baseline of no layers and no scenarios. Just clean it up as soon as possible. Definitely avoid layer 4 at any time. == minor lessons Avoid unit tests for trivial things, write scenarios in context as much as possible. But within those margins unit tests are fine. Just introduce them before any scenarios (commit 3297). Reorganizing layers can be easy. Just merge layers for starters! Punt on resplitting them in some new way until you've gotten them to work. This is the wisdom of Refactoring: small steps. What made it hard was not wanting to merge *everything* between layer 30 and 55. The eventual insight was realizing I just need to move those two full-strength transforms and nothing else.
2016-09-10 01:32:52 +00:00
}
return result_header;
}
2016-09-10 19:55:21 +00:00
:(before "End Unit Tests")
void test_from_reagent_atomic() {
reagent a("{f: recipe}");
recipe r_header = from_reagent(a);
CHECK(r_header.ingredients.empty());
CHECK(r_header.products.empty());
}
void test_from_reagent_non_atomic() {
reagent a("{f: (recipe number -> number)}");
recipe r_header = from_reagent(a);
CHECK_EQ(SIZE(r_header.ingredients), 1);
CHECK_EQ(SIZE(r_header.products), 1);
}
void test_from_reagent_reads_ingredient_at_end() {
reagent a("{f: (recipe number number)}");
recipe r_header = from_reagent(a);
CHECK_EQ(SIZE(r_header.ingredients), 2);
CHECK(r_header.products.empty());
}
2016-09-10 23:16:15 +00:00
void test_from_reagent_reads_sole_ingredient_at_end() {
reagent a("{f: (recipe number)}");
recipe r_header = from_reagent(a);
CHECK_EQ(SIZE(r_header.ingredients), 1);
CHECK(r_header.products.empty());
}
3309 Rip out everything to fix one failing unit test (commit 3290; type abbreviations). This commit does several things at once that I couldn't come up with a clean way to unpack: A. It moves to a new representation for type trees without changing the actual definition of the `type_tree` struct. B. It adds unit tests for our type metadata precomputation, so that errors there show up early and in a simpler setting rather than dying when we try to load Mu code. C. It fixes a bug, guarding against infinite loops when precomputing metadata for recursive shape-shifting containers. To do this it uses a dumb way of comparing type_trees, comparing their string representations instead. That is likely incredibly inefficient. Perhaps due to C, this commit has made Mu incredibly slow. Running all tests for the core and the edit/ app now takes 6.5 minutes rather than 3.5 minutes. == more notes and details I've been struggling for the past week now to back out of a bad design decision, a premature optimization from the early days: storing atoms directly in the 'value' slot of a cons cell rather than creating a special 'atom' cons cell and storing it on the 'left' slot. In other words, if a cons cell looks like this: o / | \ left val right ..then the type_tree (a b c) used to look like this (before this commit): o | \ a o | \ b o | \ c null ..rather than like this 'classic' approach to s-expressions which never mixes val and right (which is what we now have): o / \ o o | / \ a o o | / \ b o null | c The old approach made several operations more complicated, most recently the act of replacing a (possibly atom/leaf) sub-tree with another. That was the final straw that got me to realize the contortions I was going through to save a few type_tree nodes (cons cells). Switching to the new approach was hard partly because I've been using the old approach for so long and type_tree manipulations had pervaded everything. Another issue I ran into was the realization that my layers were not cleanly separated. Key parts of early layers (precomputing type metadata) existed purely for far later ones (shape-shifting types). Layers I got repeatedly stuck at: 1. the transform for precomputing type sizes (layer 30) 2. type-checks on merge instructions (layer 31) 3. the transform for precomputing address offsets in types (layer 36) 4. replace operations in supporting shape-shifting recipes (layer 55) After much thrashing I finally noticed that it wasn't the entirety of these layers that was giving me trouble, but just the type metadata precomputation, which had bugs that weren't manifesting until 30 layers later. Or, worse, when loading .mu files before any tests had had a chance to run. A common failure mode was running into types at run time that I hadn't precomputed metadata for at transform time. Digging into these bugs got me to realize that what I had before wasn't really very good, but a half-assed heuristic approach that did a whole lot of extra work precomputing metadata for utterly meaningless types like `((address number) 3)` which just happened to be part of a larger type like `(array (address number) 3)`. So, I redid it all. I switched the representation of types (because the old representation made unit tests difficult to retrofit) and added unit tests to the metadata precomputation. I also made layer 30 only do the minimal metadata precomputation it needs for the concepts introduced until then. In the process, I also made the precomputation more correct than before, and added hooks in the right place so that I could augment the logic when I introduced shape-shifting containers. == lessons learned There's several levels of hygiene when it comes to layers: 1. Every layer introduces precisely what it needs and in the simplest way possible. If I was building an app until just that layer, nothing would seem over-engineered. 2. Some layers are fore-shadowing features in future layers. Sometimes this is ok. For example, layer 10 foreshadows containers and arrays and so on without actually supporting them. That is a net win because it lets me lay out the core of Mu's data structures out in one place. But if the fore-shadowing gets too complex things get nasty. Not least because it can be hard to write unit tests for features before you provide the plumbing to visualize and manipulate them. 3. A layer is introducing features that are tested only in later layers. 4. A layer is introducing features with tests that are invalidated in later layers. (This I knew from early on to be an obviously horrendous idea.) Summary: avoid Level 2 (foreshadowing layers) as much as possible. Tolerate it indefinitely for small things where the code stays simple over time, but become strict again when things start to get more complex. Level 3 is mostly a net lose, but sometimes it can be expedient (a real case of the usually grossly over-applied term "technical debt"), and it's better than the conventional baseline of no layers and no scenarios. Just clean it up as soon as possible. Definitely avoid layer 4 at any time. == minor lessons Avoid unit tests for trivial things, write scenarios in context as much as possible. But within those margins unit tests are fine. Just introduce them before any scenarios (commit 3297). Reorganizing layers can be easy. Just merge layers for starters! Punt on resplitting them in some new way until you've gotten them to work. This is the wisdom of Refactoring: small steps. What made it hard was not wanting to merge *everything* between layer 30 and 55. The eventual insight was realizing I just need to move those two full-strength transforms and nothing else.
2016-09-10 01:32:52 +00:00
2016-09-10 19:55:21 +00:00
:(code)
2016-06-12 07:10:32 +00:00
reagent next_recipe_reagent(const type_tree* curr) {
if (!curr->left) return reagent("recipe:"+curr->name);
2018-03-14 07:59:41 +00:00
return reagent(new type_tree(*curr));
2016-06-12 07:10:32 +00:00
}
2016-05-06 07:46:39 +00:00
bool is_mu_recipe(const reagent& r) {
if (!r.type) return false;
if (r.type->atom) {
// End is_mu_recipe Atom Cases(r)
3309 Rip out everything to fix one failing unit test (commit 3290; type abbreviations). This commit does several things at once that I couldn't come up with a clean way to unpack: A. It moves to a new representation for type trees without changing the actual definition of the `type_tree` struct. B. It adds unit tests for our type metadata precomputation, so that errors there show up early and in a simpler setting rather than dying when we try to load Mu code. C. It fixes a bug, guarding against infinite loops when precomputing metadata for recursive shape-shifting containers. To do this it uses a dumb way of comparing type_trees, comparing their string representations instead. That is likely incredibly inefficient. Perhaps due to C, this commit has made Mu incredibly slow. Running all tests for the core and the edit/ app now takes 6.5 minutes rather than 3.5 minutes. == more notes and details I've been struggling for the past week now to back out of a bad design decision, a premature optimization from the early days: storing atoms directly in the 'value' slot of a cons cell rather than creating a special 'atom' cons cell and storing it on the 'left' slot. In other words, if a cons cell looks like this: o / | \ left val right ..then the type_tree (a b c) used to look like this (before this commit): o | \ a o | \ b o | \ c null ..rather than like this 'classic' approach to s-expressions which never mixes val and right (which is what we now have): o / \ o o | / \ a o o | / \ b o null | c The old approach made several operations more complicated, most recently the act of replacing a (possibly atom/leaf) sub-tree with another. That was the final straw that got me to realize the contortions I was going through to save a few type_tree nodes (cons cells). Switching to the new approach was hard partly because I've been using the old approach for so long and type_tree manipulations had pervaded everything. Another issue I ran into was the realization that my layers were not cleanly separated. Key parts of early layers (precomputing type metadata) existed purely for far later ones (shape-shifting types). Layers I got repeatedly stuck at: 1. the transform for precomputing type sizes (layer 30) 2. type-checks on merge instructions (layer 31) 3. the transform for precomputing address offsets in types (layer 36) 4. replace operations in supporting shape-shifting recipes (layer 55) After much thrashing I finally noticed that it wasn't the entirety of these layers that was giving me trouble, but just the type metadata precomputation, which had bugs that weren't manifesting until 30 layers later. Or, worse, when loading .mu files before any tests had had a chance to run. A common failure mode was running into types at run time that I hadn't precomputed metadata for at transform time. Digging into these bugs got me to realize that what I had before wasn't really very good, but a half-assed heuristic approach that did a whole lot of extra work precomputing metadata for utterly meaningless types like `((address number) 3)` which just happened to be part of a larger type like `(array (address number) 3)`. So, I redid it all. I switched the representation of types (because the old representation made unit tests difficult to retrofit) and added unit tests to the metadata precomputation. I also made layer 30 only do the minimal metadata precomputation it needs for the concepts introduced until then. In the process, I also made the precomputation more correct than before, and added hooks in the right place so that I could augment the logic when I introduced shape-shifting containers. == lessons learned There's several levels of hygiene when it comes to layers: 1. Every layer introduces precisely what it needs and in the simplest way possible. If I was building an app until just that layer, nothing would seem over-engineered. 2. Some layers are fore-shadowing features in future layers. Sometimes this is ok. For example, layer 10 foreshadows containers and arrays and so on without actually supporting them. That is a net win because it lets me lay out the core of Mu's data structures out in one place. But if the fore-shadowing gets too complex things get nasty. Not least because it can be hard to write unit tests for features before you provide the plumbing to visualize and manipulate them. 3. A layer is introducing features that are tested only in later layers. 4. A layer is introducing features with tests that are invalidated in later layers. (This I knew from early on to be an obviously horrendous idea.) Summary: avoid Level 2 (foreshadowing layers) as much as possible. Tolerate it indefinitely for small things where the code stays simple over time, but become strict again when things start to get more complex. Level 3 is mostly a net lose, but sometimes it can be expedient (a real case of the usually grossly over-applied term "technical debt"), and it's better than the conventional baseline of no layers and no scenarios. Just clean it up as soon as possible. Definitely avoid layer 4 at any time. == minor lessons Avoid unit tests for trivial things, write scenarios in context as much as possible. But within those margins unit tests are fine. Just introduce them before any scenarios (commit 3297). Reorganizing layers can be easy. Just merge layers for starters! Punt on resplitting them in some new way until you've gotten them to work. This is the wisdom of Refactoring: small steps. What made it hard was not wanting to merge *everything* between layer 30 and 55. The eventual insight was realizing I just need to move those two full-strength transforms and nothing else.
2016-09-10 01:32:52 +00:00
return r.type->name == "recipe-literal";
}
2017-08-30 10:07:18 +00:00
return r.type->left->atom && r.type->left->name == "recipe";
2015-10-07 07:22:49 +00:00
}
2016-01-19 00:46:07 +00:00
:(scenario copy_typecheck_recipe_variable)
% Hide_errors = true;
def main [
2016-09-17 17:28:25 +00:00
3:num <- copy 34 # abc def
2016-01-19 00:46:07 +00:00
{1: (recipe number -> number)} <- copy f # store literal in a matching variable
{2: (recipe boolean -> boolean)} <- copy {1: (recipe number -> number)} # mismatch between recipe variables
]
2016-09-17 17:28:25 +00:00
def f x:num -> y:num [
2016-01-19 00:46:07 +00:00
local-scope
load-ingredients
y <- copy x
]
+error: main: can't copy '{1: (recipe number -> number)}' to '{2: (recipe boolean -> boolean)}'; types don't match
:(scenario copy_typecheck_recipe_variable_2)
% Hide_errors = true;
def main [
{1: (recipe number -> number)} <- copy f # mismatch with a recipe literal
]
2016-09-17 07:46:03 +00:00
def f x:bool -> y:bool [
local-scope
load-ingredients
y <- copy x
]
+error: main: can't copy 'f' to '{1: (recipe number -> number)}'; types don't match
:(before "End Matching Types For Literal(to)")
if (is_mu_recipe(to)) {
if (!contains_key(Recipe, from.value)) {
2016-02-26 21:04:55 +00:00
raise << "trying to store recipe " << from.name << " into " << to_string(to) << " but there's no such recipe\n" << end();
return false;
}
const recipe& rrhs = get(Recipe, from.value);
const recipe& rlhs = from_reagent(to);
2016-10-20 05:10:35 +00:00
for (long int i = 0; i < min(SIZE(rlhs.ingredients), SIZE(rrhs.ingredients)); ++i) {
if (!types_match(rlhs.ingredients.at(i), rrhs.ingredients.at(i)))
return false;
}
2016-10-20 05:10:35 +00:00
for (long int i = 0; i < min(SIZE(rlhs.products), SIZE(rrhs.products)); ++i) {
if (!types_match(rlhs.products.at(i), rrhs.products.at(i)))
return false;
}
return true;
}
2016-06-12 07:10:32 +00:00
:(scenario call_variable_compound_ingredient)
def main [
{1: (recipe (address number) -> number)} <- copy f
2018-06-17 18:20:53 +00:00
2:&:num <- copy null
2016-09-17 19:55:10 +00:00
3:num <- call {1: (recipe (address number) -> number)}, 2:&:num
2016-06-12 07:10:32 +00:00
]
2016-09-17 19:55:10 +00:00
def f x:&:num -> y:num [
2016-06-12 07:10:32 +00:00
local-scope
load-ingredients
y <- deaddress x
2016-06-12 07:10:32 +00:00
]
$error: 0
2017-11-04 01:01:59 +00:00
//: make sure we don't accidentally break on a recipe literal
:(scenario jump_forbidden_on_recipe_literals)
% Hide_errors = true;
def foo [
local-scope
]
def main [
local-scope
{
break-if foo
}
]
# error should be as if foo is not a recipe
2016-10-24 04:45:51 +00:00
+error: main: missing type for 'foo' in 'break-if foo'
:(before "End JUMP_IF Checks")
check_for_recipe_literals(inst, get(Recipe, r));
:(before "End JUMP_UNLESS Checks")
check_for_recipe_literals(inst, get(Recipe, r));
:(code)
void check_for_recipe_literals(const instruction& inst, const recipe& caller) {
2016-10-20 05:10:35 +00:00
for (int i = 0; i < SIZE(inst.ingredients); ++i) {
if (is_mu_recipe(inst.ingredients.at(i))) {
2017-05-26 23:43:18 +00:00
raise << maybe(caller.name) << "missing type for '" << inst.ingredients.at(i).original_string << "' in '" << to_original_string(inst) << "'\n" << end();
if (is_present_in_ingredients(caller, inst.ingredients.at(i).name))
raise << " did you forget 'load-ingredients'?\n" << end();
}
}
}
:(scenario load_ingredients_missing_error_3)
% Hide_errors = true;
def foo {f: (recipe num -> num)} [
local-scope
b:num <- call f, 1
]
+error: foo: missing type for 'f' in 'b:num <- call f, 1'
+error: did you forget 'load-ingredients'?
2017-06-02 07:44:27 +00:00
:(before "End Mu Types Initialization")
put(Type_abbreviations, "function", new_type_tree("recipe"));
2018-02-22 04:49:04 +00:00
put(Type_abbreviations, "fn", new_type_tree("recipe"));
2017-06-02 07:44:27 +00:00
//: copying functions to variables
:(scenario copy_recipe_to_variable)
2017-06-02 07:44:27 +00:00
def main [
2018-02-22 04:49:04 +00:00
{1: (fn number -> number)} <- copy f
2017-06-02 07:44:27 +00:00
2:num <- call {1: (function number -> number)}, 34
]
def f x:num -> y:num [
local-scope
load-ingredients
y <- copy x
]
+mem: storing 34 in location 2
:(scenario copy_overloaded_recipe_to_variable)
def main [
local-scope
{x: (fn num -> num)} <- copy f
1:num/raw <- call x, 34
]
# variant f
def f x:bool -> y:bool [
local-scope
load-ingredients
y <- copy x
]
# variant f_2
def f x:num -> y:num [
local-scope
load-ingredients
y <- copy x
]
# x contains f_2
+mem: storing 34 in location 1
:(before "End resolve_ambiguous_call(r, index, inst, caller_recipe) Special-cases")
if (inst.name == "copy") {
for (int i = 0; i < SIZE(inst.ingredients); ++i) {
if (!is_recipe_literal(inst.ingredients.at(i))) continue;
if (non_ghost_size(get_or_insert(Recipe_variants, inst.ingredients.at(i).name)) < 1) continue;
// potentially overloaded recipe
string new_name = resolve_ambiguous_call(inst.ingredients.at(i).name, inst.products.at(i), r, index, caller_recipe);
if (new_name == "") continue;
inst.ingredients.at(i).name = new_name;
inst.ingredients.at(i).value = get(Recipe_ordinal, new_name);
}
return;
}
:(code)
string resolve_ambiguous_call(const string& recipe_name, const reagent& call_types, const recipe_ordinal r, int index, const recipe& caller_recipe) {
instruction inst;
inst.name = recipe_name;
if (!is_mu_recipe(call_types)) return ""; // error raised elsewhere
if (is_recipe_literal(call_types)) return ""; // error raised elsewhere
construct_fake_call(call_types, inst);
resolve_ambiguous_call(r, index, inst, caller_recipe);
return inst.name;
}
void construct_fake_call(const reagent& recipe_var, instruction& out) {
assert(recipe_var.type->left->name == "recipe");
type_tree* stem = NULL;
for (stem = recipe_var.type->right; stem && stem->left->name != "->"; stem = stem->right)
out.ingredients.push_back(copy(stem->left));
if (stem == NULL) return;
for (/*skip '->'*/stem = stem->right; stem; stem = stem->right)
out.products.push_back(copy(stem->left));
}
:(scenario copy_shape_shifting_recipe_to_variable)
def main [
local-scope
{x: (fn num -> num)} <- copy f
1:num/raw <- call x, 34
]
def f x:_elem -> y:_elem [
local-scope
load-inputs
y <- copy x
]
+mem: storing 34 in location 1
//: passing function literals to (higher-order) functions
:(scenario pass_overloaded_recipe_literal_to_ingredient)
# like copy_overloaded_recipe_to_variable except we bind 'x' in the course of
# a 'call' rather than 'copy'
def main [
1:num <- g f
]
def g {x: (fn num -> num)} -> result:num [
local-scope
load-ingredients
result <- call x, 34
]
# variant f
def f x:bool -> y:bool [
local-scope
load-ingredients
y <- copy x
]
# variant f_2
def f x:num -> y:num [
local-scope
load-ingredients
y <- copy x
]
# x contains f_2
+mem: storing 34 in location 1
:(after "End resolve_ambiguous_call(r, index, inst, caller_recipe) Special-cases")
for (int i = 0; i < SIZE(inst.ingredients); ++i) {
if (!is_mu_recipe(inst.ingredients.at(i))) continue;
if (non_ghost_size(get_or_insert(Recipe_variants, inst.ingredients.at(i).name)) < 1) continue;
if (get(Recipe_ordinal, inst.name) < MAX_PRIMITIVE_RECIPES) continue;
if (non_ghost_size(get_or_insert(Recipe_variants, inst.name)) > 1) {
raise << maybe(caller_recipe.name) << "sorry, we're not yet smart enough to simultaneously guess which overloads you want for '" << inst.name << "' and '" << inst.ingredients.at(i).name << "'\n" << end();
return;
}
const recipe& callee = get(Recipe, get(Recipe_ordinal, inst.name));
if (!callee.has_header) {
raise << maybe(caller_recipe.name) << "sorry, we're not yet smart enough to guess which variant of '" << inst.ingredients.at(i).name << "' you want, when the caller '" << inst.name << "' doesn't have a header\n" << end();
return;
}
string new_name = resolve_ambiguous_call(inst.ingredients.at(i).name, callee.ingredients.at(i), r, index, caller_recipe);
if (new_name != "") {
inst.ingredients.at(i).name = new_name;
inst.ingredients.at(i).value = get(Recipe_ordinal, new_name);
}
}
:(scenario return_overloaded_recipe_literal_to_caller)
def main [
local-scope
{x: (fn num -> num)} <- g
1:num/raw <- call x, 34
]
def g -> {x: (fn num -> num)} [
local-scope
return f
]
# variant f
def f x:bool -> y:bool [
local-scope
load-ingredients
y <- copy x
]
# variant f_2
def f x:num -> y:num [
local-scope
load-ingredients
y <- copy x
]
# x contains f_2
+mem: storing 34 in location 1
:(before "End resolve_ambiguous_call(r, index, inst, caller_recipe) Special-cases")
if (inst.name == "return" || inst.name == "reply") {
for (int i = 0; i < SIZE(inst.ingredients); ++i) {
if (!is_recipe_literal(inst.ingredients.at(i))) continue;
if (non_ghost_size(get_or_insert(Recipe_variants, inst.ingredients.at(i).name)) < 1) continue;
// potentially overloaded recipe
if (!caller_recipe.has_header) {
raise << maybe(caller_recipe.name) << "sorry, we're not yet smart enough to guess which variant of '" << inst.ingredients.at(i).name << "' you want, without a recipe header\n" << end();
return;
}
string new_name = resolve_ambiguous_call(inst.ingredients.at(i).name, caller_recipe.products.at(i), r, index, caller_recipe);
if (new_name == "") continue;
inst.ingredients.at(i).name = new_name;
inst.ingredients.at(i).value = get(Recipe_ordinal, new_name);
}
return;
}