mu/031merge.cc
Kartik Agaram 4a943d4ed3 5001 - drop the :(scenario) DSL
I've been saying for a while[1][2][3] that adding extra abstractions makes
things harder for newcomers, and adding new notations doubly so. And then
I notice this DSL in my own backyard. Makes me feel like a hypocrite.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13565743#13570092
[2] https://lobste.rs/s/to8wpr/configuration_files_are_canary_warning
[3] https://lobste.rs/s/mdmcdi/little_languages_by_jon_bentley_1986#c_3miuf2

The implementation of the DSL was also highly hacky:

a) It was happening in the tangle/ tool, but was utterly unrelated to tangling
layers.

b) There were several persnickety constraints on the different kinds of
lines and the specific order they were expected in. I kept finding bugs
where the translator would silently do the wrong thing. Or the error messages
sucked, and readers may be stuck looking at the generated code to figure
out what happened. Fixing error messages would require a lot more code,
which is one of my arguments against DSLs in the first place: they may
be easy to implement, but they're hard to design to go with the grain of
the underlying platform. They require lots of iteration. Is that effort
worth prioritizing in this project?

On the other hand, the DSL did make at least some readers' life easier,
the ones who weren't immediately put off by having to learn a strange syntax.
There were fewer quotes to parse, fewer backslash escapes.

Anyway, since there are also people who dislike having to put up with strange
syntaxes, we'll call that consideration a wash and tear this DSL out.

---

This commit was sheer drudgery. Hopefully it won't need to be redone with
a new DSL because I grow sick of backslashes.
2019-03-12 19:14:12 -07:00

271 lines
8.8 KiB
C++

//: Construct types out of their constituent fields.
void test_merge() {
run(
"container foo [\n"
" x:num\n"
" y:num\n"
"]\n"
"def main [\n"
" 1:foo <- merge 3, 4\n"
"]\n"
);
CHECK_TRACE_CONTENTS(
"mem: storing 3 in location 1\n"
"mem: storing 4 in location 2\n"
);
}
:(before "End Primitive Recipe Declarations")
MERGE,
:(before "End Primitive Recipe Numbers")
put(Recipe_ordinal, "merge", MERGE);
:(before "End Primitive Recipe Checks")
case MERGE: {
// type-checking in a separate transform below
break;
}
:(before "End Primitive Recipe Implementations")
case MERGE: {
products.resize(1);
for (int i = 0; i < SIZE(ingredients); ++i)
for (int j = 0; j < SIZE(ingredients.at(i)); ++j)
products.at(0).push_back(ingredients.at(i).at(j));
break;
}
//: type-check 'merge' to avoid interpreting numbers as addresses
:(code)
void test_merge_check() {
run(
"def main [\n"
" 1:point <- merge 3, 4\n"
"]\n"
);
CHECK_TRACE_COUNT("error", 0);
}
void test_merge_check_missing_element() {
Hide_errors = true;
run(
"def main [\n"
" 1:point <- merge 3\n"
"]\n"
);
CHECK_TRACE_CONTENTS(
"error: main: too few ingredients in '1:point <- merge 3'\n"
);
}
void test_merge_check_extra_element() {
Hide_errors = true;
run(
"def main [\n"
" 1:point <- merge 3, 4, 5\n"
"]\n"
);
CHECK_TRACE_CONTENTS(
"error: main: too many ingredients in '1:point <- merge 3, 4, 5'\n"
);
}
//: We want to avoid causing memory corruption, but other than that we want to
//: be flexible in how we construct containers of containers. It should be
//: equally easy to define a container out of primitives or intermediate
//: container fields.
void test_merge_check_recursive_containers() {
run(
"def main [\n"
" 1:point <- merge 3, 4\n"
" 1:point-number <- merge 1:point, 5\n"
"]\n"
);
CHECK_TRACE_COUNT("error", 0);
}
void test_merge_check_recursive_containers_2() {
Hide_errors = true;
run(
"def main [\n"
" 1:point <- merge 3, 4\n"
" 2:point-number <- merge 1:point\n"
"]\n"
);
CHECK_TRACE_CONTENTS(
"error: main: too few ingredients in '2:point-number <- merge 1:point'\n"
);
}
void test_merge_check_recursive_containers_3() {
run(
"def main [\n"
" 1:point-number <- merge 3, 4, 5\n"
"]\n"
);
CHECK_TRACE_COUNT("error", 0);
}
void test_merge_check_recursive_containers_4() {
Hide_errors = true;
run(
"def main [\n"
" 1:point-number <- merge 3, 4\n"
"]\n"
);
CHECK_TRACE_CONTENTS(
"error: main: too few ingredients in '1:point-number <- merge 3, 4'\n"
);
}
void test_merge_check_reflexive() {
Hide_errors = true;
run(
"def main [\n"
" 1:point <- merge 3, 4\n"
" 2:point <- merge 1:point\n"
"]\n"
);
CHECK_TRACE_COUNT("error", 0);
}
//: Since a container can be merged in several ways, we need to be able to
//: backtrack through different possibilities. Later we'll allow creating
//: exclusive containers which contain just one of rather than all of their
//: elements. That will also require backtracking capabilities. Here's the
//: state we need to maintain for backtracking:
:(before "End Types")
struct merge_check_point {
reagent container;
int container_element_index;
merge_check_point(const reagent& c, int i) :container(c), container_element_index(i) {}
};
struct merge_check_state {
stack<merge_check_point> data;
};
:(before "End Checks")
Transform.push_back(check_merge_calls); // idempotent
:(code)
void check_merge_calls(const recipe_ordinal r) {
const recipe& caller = get(Recipe, r);
trace(101, "transform") << "--- type-check merge instructions in recipe " << caller.name << end();
for (int i = 0; i < SIZE(caller.steps); ++i) {
const instruction& inst = caller.steps.at(i);
if (inst.name != "merge") continue;
if (SIZE(inst.products) != 1) {
raise << maybe(caller.name) << "'merge' should yield a single product in '" << to_original_string(inst) << "'\n" << end();
continue;
}
reagent/*copy*/ product = inst.products.at(0);
// Update product While Type-checking Merge
const type_tree* product_base_type = product.type->atom ? product.type : product.type->left;
assert(product_base_type->atom);
if (product_base_type->value == 0 || !contains_key(Type, product_base_type->value)) {
raise << maybe(caller.name) << "'merge' should yield a container in '" << to_original_string(inst) << "'\n" << end();
continue;
}
const type_info& info = get(Type, product_base_type->value);
if (info.kind != CONTAINER && info.kind != EXCLUSIVE_CONTAINER) {
raise << maybe(caller.name) << "'merge' should yield a container in '" << to_original_string(inst) << "'\n" << end();
continue;
}
check_merge_call(inst.ingredients, product, caller, inst);
}
}
void check_merge_call(const vector<reagent>& ingredients, const reagent& product, const recipe& caller, const instruction& inst) {
int ingredient_index = 0;
merge_check_state state;
state.data.push(merge_check_point(product, 0));
while (true) {
assert(!state.data.empty());
trace(102, "transform") << ingredient_index << " vs " << SIZE(ingredients) << end();
if (ingredient_index >= SIZE(ingredients)) {
raise << maybe(caller.name) << "too few ingredients in '" << to_original_string(inst) << "'\n" << end();
return;
}
reagent& container = state.data.top().container;
if (!container.type) return; // error handled elsewhere
const type_tree* top_root_type = container.type->atom ? container.type : container.type->left;
assert(top_root_type->atom);
type_info& container_info = get(Type, top_root_type->value);
switch (container_info.kind) {
case CONTAINER: {
// degenerate case: merge with the same type always succeeds
if (state.data.top().container_element_index == 0 && types_coercible(container, inst.ingredients.at(ingredient_index)))
return;
const reagent& expected_ingredient = element_type(container.type, state.data.top().container_element_index);
trace(102, "transform") << "checking container " << to_string(container) << " || " << to_string(expected_ingredient) << " vs ingredient " << ingredient_index << end();
// if the current element is the ingredient we expect, move on to the next element/ingredient
if (types_coercible(expected_ingredient, ingredients.at(ingredient_index))) {
++ingredient_index;
++state.data.top().container_element_index;
while (state.data.top().container_element_index >= SIZE(get(Type, get_base_type(state.data.top().container.type)->value).elements)) {
state.data.pop();
if (state.data.empty()) {
if (ingredient_index < SIZE(ingredients))
raise << maybe(caller.name) << "too many ingredients in '" << to_original_string(inst) << "'\n" << end();
return;
}
++state.data.top().container_element_index;
}
}
// if not, maybe it's a field of the current element
else {
// no change to ingredient_index
state.data.push(merge_check_point(expected_ingredient, 0));
}
break;
}
// End check_merge_call Special-cases
default: {
if (!types_coercible(container, ingredients.at(ingredient_index))) {
raise << maybe(caller.name) << "incorrect type of ingredient " << ingredient_index << " in '" << to_original_string(inst) << "'\n" << end();
raise << " (expected '" << debug_string(container) << "')\n" << end();
raise << " (got '" << debug_string(ingredients.at(ingredient_index)) << "')\n" << end();
return;
}
++ingredient_index;
// ++state.data.top().container_element_index; // unnecessary, but wouldn't do any harm
do {
state.data.pop();
if (state.data.empty()) {
if (ingredient_index < SIZE(ingredients))
raise << maybe(caller.name) << "too many ingredients in '" << to_original_string(inst) << "'\n" << end();
return;
}
++state.data.top().container_element_index;
} while (state.data.top().container_element_index >= SIZE(get(Type, get_base_type(state.data.top().container.type)->value).elements));
}
}
}
// never gets here
assert(false);
}
//: replaced in a later layer
//: todo: find some clean way to take this call completely out of this layer
const type_tree* get_base_type(const type_tree* t) {
return t;
}
void test_merge_check_product() {
Hide_errors = true;
run(
"def main [\n"
" 1:num <- merge 3\n"
"]\n"
);
CHECK_TRACE_CONTENTS(
"error: main: 'merge' should yield a container in '1:num <- merge 3'\n"
);
}
:(before "End Includes")
#include <stack>
using std::stack;