diff options
Diffstat (limited to '057immutable.cc')
| -rw-r--r-- | 057immutable.cc | 544 |
1 files changed, 544 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/057immutable.cc b/057immutable.cc new file mode 100644 index 00000000..7c04bf36 --- /dev/null +++ b/057immutable.cc @@ -0,0 +1,544 @@ +//: Ingredients of a recipe are meant to be immutable unless they're also +//: products. This layer will start enforcing this check. +//: +//: One hole for now: variables in surrounding spaces are implicitly mutable. + +:(scenario can_modify_ingredients_that_are_also_products) +# mutable container +def main [ + local-scope + p:point <- merge 34, 35 + p <- foo p +] +def foo p:point -> p:point [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + p <- put p, x:offset, 34 +] +$error: 0 + +:(scenario can_modify_ingredients_that_are_also_products_2) +def main [ + local-scope + p:address:point <- new point:type + p <- foo p +] +# mutable address to container +def foo p:address:point -> p:address:point [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + *p <- put *p, x:offset, 34 +] +$error: 0 + +:(scenario can_modify_ingredients_that_are_also_products_3) +def main [ + local-scope + p:address:array:number <- new number:type, 3 + p <- foo p +] +# mutable address +def foo p:address:array:number -> p:address:array:number [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + *p <- put-index *p, 0, 34 +] +$error: 0 + +:(scenario ignore_literal_ingredients_for_immutability_checks) +def main [ + local-scope + p:address:d1 <- new d1:type + q:number <- foo p +] +def foo p:address:d1 -> q:number [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + x:address:d1 <- new d1:type + *x <- put *x, p:offset, 34 # ignore this 'p' + reply 36 +] +container d1 [ + p:number + q:number +] +$error: 0 + +:(scenario cannot_modify_immutable_ingredients) +% Hide_errors = true; +def main [ + local-scope + x:address:number <- new number:type + foo x +] +# immutable address to primitive +def foo x:address:number [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + *x <- copy 34 +] ++error: foo: cannot modify x in instruction '*x <- copy 34' because it's an ingredient of recipe foo but not also a product + +:(scenario can_modify_immutable_pointers) +def main [ + local-scope + x:address:number <- new number:type + foo x +] +def foo x:address:number [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + # modify the address, not the payload + x <- copy 0 +] +$error: 0 + +:(scenario can_modify_immutable_pointers_but_not_their_payloads) +% Hide_errors = true; +def main [ + local-scope + x:address:number <- new number:type + foo x +] +def foo x:address:number [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + # modify address; ok + x <- new number:type + # modify payload: boom + # this could be ok, but we're not going to try to be that smart + *x <- copy 34 +] ++error: foo: cannot modify x in instruction '*x <- copy 34' because it's an ingredient of recipe foo but not also a product + +:(scenario cannot_call_mutating_recipes_on_immutable_ingredients) +% Hide_errors = true; +def main [ + local-scope + p:address:point <- new point:type + foo p +] +def foo p:address:point [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + bar p +] +def bar p:address:point -> p:address:point [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + # p could be modified here, but it doesn't have to be, it's already marked + # mutable in the header +] ++error: foo: cannot modify p in instruction 'bar p' because it's an ingredient of recipe foo but not also a product + +:(scenario cannot_modify_copies_of_immutable_ingredients) +% Hide_errors = true; +def main [ + local-scope + p:address:point <- new point:type + foo p +] +def foo p:address:point [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + q:address:point <- copy p + *q <- put *q, x:offset, 34 +] ++error: foo: cannot modify q in instruction '*q <- put *q, x:offset, 34' because that would modify p which is an ingredient of recipe foo but not also a product + +:(scenario can_modify_copies_of_mutable_ingredients) +def main [ + local-scope + p:address:point <- new point:type + foo p +] +def foo p:address:point -> p:address:point [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + q:address:point <- copy p + *q <- put *q, x:offset, 34 +] +$error: 0 + +:(scenario cannot_modify_address_inside_immutable_ingredients) +% Hide_errors = true; +container foo [ + x:address:array:number # contains an address +] +def main [ + # don't run anything +] +def foo a:address:foo [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + x:address:array:number <- get *a, x:offset # just a regular get of the container + *x <- put-index *x, 0, 34 # but then a put-index on the result +] ++error: foo: cannot modify x in instruction '*x <- put-index *x, 0, 34' because that would modify a which is an ingredient of recipe foo but not also a product + +:(scenario cannot_modify_address_inside_immutable_ingredients_2) +container foo [ + x:address:array:number # contains an address +] +def main [ + # don't run anything +] +def foo a:address:foo [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + b:foo <- merge 0 + # modify b, completely unrelated to immutable ingredient a + x:address:array:number <- get b, x:offset + *x <- put-index *x, 0, 34 +] +$error: 0 + +:(scenario cannot_modify_address_inside_immutable_ingredients_3) +% Hide_errors = true; +container foo [ + x:number +] +def main [ + # don't run anything +] +def foo a:address:array:address:number [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + x:address:number <- index *a, 0 # just a regular index of the array + *x <- copy 34 # but then modify the result +] ++error: foo: cannot modify x in instruction '*x <- copy 34' because that would modify a which is an ingredient of recipe foo but not also a product + +:(scenario cannot_modify_address_inside_immutable_ingredients_4) +container foo [ + x:address:array:number # contains an address +] +def main [ + # don't run anything +] +def foo a:address:array:address:number [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + b:address:array:address:number <- new {(address number): type}, 3 + # modify b, completely unrelated to immutable ingredient a + x:address:number <- index *b, 0 + *x <- copy 34 +] +$error: 0 + +:(scenario can_traverse_immutable_ingredients) +container test-list [ + next:address:test-list +] +def main [ + local-scope + p:address:test-list <- new test-list:type + foo p +] +def foo p:address:test-list [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + p2:address:test-list <- bar p +] +def bar x:address:test-list -> y:address:test-list [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + y <- get *x, next:offset +] +$error: 0 + +:(scenario treat_optional_ingredients_as_mutable) +def main [ + k:address:number <- new number:type + test k +] +# recipe taking an immutable address ingredient +def test k:address:number [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + foo k +] +# ..calling a recipe with an optional address ingredient +def foo -> [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + k:address:number, found?:boolean <- next-ingredient + # we don't further check k for immutability, but assume it's mutable +] +$error: 0 + +:(scenario treat_optional_ingredients_as_mutable_2) +% Hide_errors = true; +def main [ + local-scope + p:address:point <- new point:type + foo p +] +def foo p:address:point [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + bar p +] +def bar [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + p:address:point <- next-ingredient # optional ingredient; assumed to be mutable +] ++error: foo: cannot modify p in instruction 'bar p' because it's an ingredient of recipe foo but not also a product + +//: when checking for immutable ingredients, remember to take space into account +:(scenario check_space_of_reagents_in_immutability_checks) +def main [ + a:address:array:location <- new-closure + b:address:number <- new number:type + run-closure b:address:number, a:address:array:location +] +def new-closure [ + new-default-space + x:address:number <- new number:type + return default-space +] +def run-closure x:address:number, s:address:array:location [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + 0:address:array:location/names:new-closure <- copy s + # different space; always mutable + *x:address:number/space:1 <- copy 34 +] +$error: 0 + +:(before "End Transforms") +Transform.push_back(check_immutable_ingredients); // idempotent + +:(code) +void check_immutable_ingredients(recipe_ordinal r) { + // to ensure an address reagent isn't modified, it suffices to show that + // a) we never write to its contents directly, + // b) we never call 'put' or 'put-index' on it, and + // c) any non-primitive recipe calls in the body aren't returning it as a product + const recipe& caller = get(Recipe, r); + trace(9991, "transform") << "--- check mutability of ingredients in recipe " << caller.name << end(); + if (!caller.has_header) return; // skip check for old-style recipes calling next-ingredient directly + for (int i = 0; i < SIZE(caller.ingredients); ++i) { + const reagent& current_ingredient = caller.ingredients.at(i); + if (!is_mu_address(current_ingredient)) continue; // will be copied + if (is_present_in_products(caller, current_ingredient.name)) continue; // not expected to be immutable + // End Immutable Ingredients Special-cases + set<reagent> immutable_vars; + immutable_vars.insert(current_ingredient); + for (int i = 0; i < SIZE(caller.steps); ++i) { + const instruction& inst = caller.steps.at(i); + check_immutable_ingredient_in_instruction(inst, immutable_vars, current_ingredient.name, caller); + update_aliases(inst, immutable_vars); + } + } +} + +void update_aliases(const instruction& inst, set<reagent>& current_ingredient_and_aliases) { + set<int> current_ingredient_indices = ingredient_indices(inst, current_ingredient_and_aliases); + if (!contains_key(Recipe, inst.operation)) { + // primitive recipe + switch (inst.operation) { + case COPY: + for (set<int>::iterator p = current_ingredient_indices.begin(); p != current_ingredient_indices.end(); ++p) + current_ingredient_and_aliases.insert(inst.products.at(*p).name); + break; + case GET: + case INDEX: + // current_ingredient_indices can only have 0 or one value + if (!current_ingredient_indices.empty()) { + if (is_mu_address(inst.products.at(0))) + current_ingredient_and_aliases.insert(inst.products.at(0)); + } + break; + default: break; + } + } + else { + // defined recipe + set<int> contained_in_product_indices = scan_contained_in_product_indices(inst, current_ingredient_indices); + for (set<int>::iterator p = contained_in_product_indices.begin(); p != contained_in_product_indices.end(); ++p) { + if (*p < SIZE(inst.products)) + current_ingredient_and_aliases.insert(inst.products.at(*p)); + } + } +} + +set<int> scan_contained_in_product_indices(const instruction& inst, set<int>& ingredient_indices) { + set<reagent> selected_ingredients; + const recipe& callee = get(Recipe, inst.operation); + for (set<int>::iterator p = ingredient_indices.begin(); p != ingredient_indices.end(); ++p) { + if (*p >= SIZE(callee.ingredients)) continue; // optional immutable ingredient + selected_ingredients.insert(callee.ingredients.at(*p)); + } + set<int> result; + for (int i = 0; i < SIZE(callee.products); ++i) { + const reagent& current_product = callee.products.at(i); + // TODO + const string_tree* contained_in_name = property(current_product, "contained-in"); + if (contained_in_name && selected_ingredients.find(contained_in_name->value) != selected_ingredients.end()) + result.insert(i); + } + return result; +} + +:(scenarios transform) +:(scenario immutability_infects_contained_in_variables) +% Hide_errors = true; +container test-list [ + value:number + next:address:test-list +] +def main [ + local-scope + p:address:test-list <- new test-list:type + foo p +] +def foo p:address:test-list [ # p is immutable + local-scope + load-ingredients + p2:address:test-list <- test-next p # p2 is immutable + *p2 <- put *p2, value:offset, 34 +] +def test-next x:address:test-list -> y:address:test-list/contained-in:x [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + y <- get *x, next:offset +] ++error: foo: cannot modify p2 in instruction '*p2 <- put *p2, value:offset, 34' because that would modify p which is an ingredient of recipe foo but not also a product + +:(code) +void check_immutable_ingredient_in_instruction(const instruction& inst, const set<reagent>& current_ingredient_and_aliases, const string& original_ingredient_name, const recipe& caller) { + // first check if the instruction is directly modifying something it shouldn't + for (int i = 0; i < SIZE(inst.products); ++i) { + if (has_property(inst.products.at(i), "lookup") + && current_ingredient_and_aliases.find(inst.products.at(i)) != current_ingredient_and_aliases.end()) { + string current_product_name = inst.products.at(i).name; + if (current_product_name == original_ingredient_name) + raise << maybe(caller.name) << "cannot modify " << current_product_name << " in instruction '" << to_original_string(inst) << "' because it's an ingredient of recipe " << caller.name << " but not also a product\n" << end(); + else + raise << maybe(caller.name) << "cannot modify " << current_product_name << " in instruction '" << to_original_string(inst) << "' because that would modify " << original_ingredient_name << " which is an ingredient of recipe " << caller.name << " but not also a product\n" << end(); + return; + } + } + // check if there's any indirect modification going on + set<int> current_ingredient_indices = ingredient_indices(inst, current_ingredient_and_aliases); + if (current_ingredient_indices.empty()) return; // ingredient not found in call + for (set<int>::iterator p = current_ingredient_indices.begin(); p != current_ingredient_indices.end(); ++p) { + const int current_ingredient_index = *p; + reagent current_ingredient = inst.ingredients.at(current_ingredient_index); + canonize_type(current_ingredient); + const string& current_ingredient_name = current_ingredient.name; + if (!contains_key(Recipe, inst.operation)) { + // primitive recipe + // we got here only because we got an instruction with an implicit product, and the instruction didn't explicitly spell it out + // put x, y:offset, z + // instead of + // x <- put x, y:offset, z + if (inst.operation == PUT || inst.operation == PUT_INDEX) { + if (current_ingredient_index == 0) { + if (current_ingredient_name == original_ingredient_name) + raise << maybe(caller.name) << "cannot modify " << current_ingredient_name << " in instruction '" << to_original_string(inst) << "' because it's an ingredient of recipe " << caller.name << " but not also a product\n" << end(); + else + raise << maybe(caller.name) << "cannot modify " << current_ingredient_name << " in instruction '" << to_original_string(inst) << "' because that would modify " << original_ingredient_name << " which is an ingredient of recipe " << caller.name << " but not also a product\n" << end(); + } + } + } + else { + // defined recipe + if (!is_mu_address(current_ingredient)) return; // making a copy is ok + if (is_modified_in_recipe(inst.operation, current_ingredient_index, caller)) { + if (current_ingredient_name == original_ingredient_name) + raise << maybe(caller.name) << "cannot modify " << current_ingredient_name << " in instruction '" << to_original_string(inst) << "' because it's an ingredient of recipe " << caller.name << " but not also a product\n" << end(); + else + raise << maybe(caller.name) << "cannot modify " << current_ingredient_name << " in instruction '" << to_original_string(inst) << "' because that would modify " << original_ingredient_name << " which is an ingredient of recipe " << caller.name << " but not also a product\n" << end(); + } + } + } +} + +bool is_modified_in_recipe(recipe_ordinal r, int ingredient_index, const recipe& caller) { + const recipe& callee = get(Recipe, r); + if (!callee.has_header) { + raise << maybe(caller.name) << "can't check mutability of ingredients in " << callee.name << " because it uses 'next-ingredient' directly, rather than a recipe header.\n" << end(); + return true; + } + if (ingredient_index >= SIZE(callee.ingredients)) return false; // optional immutable ingredient + return is_present_in_products(callee, callee.ingredients.at(ingredient_index).name); +} + +bool is_present_in_products(const recipe& callee, const string& ingredient_name) { + for (int i = 0; i < SIZE(callee.products); ++i) { + if (callee.products.at(i).name == ingredient_name) + return true; + } + return false; +} + +bool is_present_in_ingredients(const recipe& callee, const string& ingredient_name) { + for (int i = 0; i < SIZE(callee.ingredients); ++i) { + if (callee.ingredients.at(i).name == ingredient_name) + return true; + } + return false; +} + +set<int> ingredient_indices(const instruction& inst, const set<reagent>& ingredient_names) { + set<int> result; + for (int i = 0; i < SIZE(inst.ingredients); ++i) { + if (is_literal(inst.ingredients.at(i))) continue; + if (ingredient_names.find(inst.ingredients.at(i)) != ingredient_names.end()) + result.insert(i); + } + return result; +} + +//: Sometimes you want to pass in two addresses, one pointing inside the +//: other. For example, you want to delete a node from a linked list. You +//: can't pass both pointers back out, because if a caller tries to make both +//: identical then you can't tell which value will be written on the way out. +//: +//: Experimental solution: just tell mu that one points inside the other. +//: This way we can return just one pointer as high up as necessary to capture +//: all modifications performed by a recipe. +//: +//: We'll see if we end up wanting to abuse /contained-in for other reasons. + +:(scenarios transform) +:(scenario can_modify_contained_in_addresses) +container test-list [ + value:number + next:address:test-list +] +def main [ + local-scope + p:address:test-list <- new test-list:type + foo p +] +def foo p:address:test-list -> p:address:test-list [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + p2:address:test-list <- test-next p + p <- test-remove p2, p +] +def test-next x:address:test-list -> y:address:test-list [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + y <- get *x, next:offset +] +def test-remove x:address:test-list/contained-in:from, from:address:test-list -> from:address:test-list [ + local-scope + load-ingredients + *x <- put *x, value:offset, 34 # can modify x +] +$error: 0 + +:(before "End Immutable Ingredients Special-cases") +if (has_property(current_ingredient, "contained-in")) { + const string_tree* tmp = property(current_ingredient, "contained-in"); + if (tmp->left || tmp->right + || !is_present_in_ingredients(caller, tmp->value) + || !is_present_in_products(caller, tmp->value)) + raise << maybe(caller.name) << "contained-in can only point to another ingredient+product, but got " << to_string(property(current_ingredient, "contained-in")) << '\n' << end(); + continue; +} |