about summary refs log tree commit diff stats
path: root/030container.cc
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
* 3143Kartik K. Agaram2016-07-241-2/+2
| | | | Fix CI.
* 3141Kartik K. Agaram2016-07-241-5/+9
| | | | | | | | | Thanks Stephen Malina for helping run into this hole in support for compound types. When I created that assert (commit 2381, Nov 2015) I was thinking only of type ingredients, and didn't realize that compound types could have internal nodes with zero values.
* 3120Kartik K. Agaram2016-07-211-4/+4
| | | | | | | | Always show instruction before any transforms in error messages. This is likely going to make some errors unclear because they *need* to show the original instruction. But if we don't have tests for those situations did they ever really work?
* 3119Kartik K. Agaram2016-07-211-1/+3
| | | | | | | Warn if 'put' or 'put-index' has a mismatch in the type of the product, not just the name. It won't do any harm, but could be misleading to a later reader. In both instructions, the product is just for documentation.
* 3108Kartik K. Agaram2016-07-101-2/+0
|
* 3061Kartik K. Agaram2016-06-171-1/+18
|
* 3045 - generalize core refcounting data structureKartik K. Agaram2016-06-111-3/+1
|
* 2992Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-201-0/+14
| | | | | Raise an error if a 'put' or 'put-index' doesn't match ingredient and product. That wouldn't do what you would expect.
* 2991Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-201-1/+1
| | | | | Never mind, always quote direct quotes from code in error messages. Dilated reagents are the uncommon case.
* 2990Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-201-12/+12
| | | | | | | | | | Standardize quotes around reagents in error messages. I'm still sure there's issues. For example, the messages when type-checking 'copy'. I'm not putting quotes around them because in layer 60 I end up creating dilated reagents, and then it's a bit much to have quotes and (two kinds of) brackets. But I'm sure I'm doing that somewhere..
* 2968Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-171-1/+1
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | More reorganization in preparation for implementing recursive abandon(). Refcounts are getting incredibly hairy. I need to juggle containers containing other containers, and containers *pointing* to other containers. For a while I considered getting rid of address_element_info entirely and just going by types for every single update_refcount. But that's definitely more work, and it's unclear that things will be cleaner/shorter/simpler. I haven't measured the speedup, but it seems worth optimizing every pointer copy to make sure we aren't manipulating types at runtime. The key insight now is a) to continue to compute information about nested containers at load time, because that's the common case when updating refcounts, but b) to compute information about *pointed* values at run-time, because that's the uncommon case. As a result, we're going to cheat in the interpreter and use type information at runtime just for abandon(), just because the corresponding task when we get to a compiler will be radically different. It will still be tractable, though.
* 2967Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-171-2/+2
|
* 2966Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-171-1/+1
|
* 2956Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-141-1/+1
|
* 2955 - back to more refcount housekeepingKartik K. Agaram2016-05-121-15/+15
| | | | | Update refcounts of address elements when copying containers. Still lots to do; see todo list at end of 036refcount.cc.
* 2935Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-071-1/+1
|
* 2934 - all layers running againKartik K. Agaram2016-05-071-1/+25
| | | | | | Since I switched to a Mac laptop (commit 2725) I've been lax in running test_all_layers because I have to ssh into a server and whatnot. I should just get CI setup somewhere..
* 2932Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-061-1/+1
| | | | | | | More consistent labeling of waypoints. Use types only when you need to distinguish between function overloadings. Otherwise just use variable names unless it's truly not apparent what they are (like that the result is a recipe in "End Rewrite Instruction").
* 2931 - be explicit about making copiesKartik K. Agaram2016-05-061-13/+13
|
* 2898 - start filling in missing refcountsKartik K. Agaram2016-05-031-3/+2
| | | | | | | This commit covers instructions 'put', 'put-index' and 'maybe-convert'. Next up are the harder ones: 'copy' and 'merge'. In these cases there's a non-scalar being copied, and we need to figure out which locations within it need to update their refcount.
* 2893Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-031-219/+0
|
* 2891 - precompute container sizes and offsetsKartik K. Agaram2016-05-021-12/+110
| | | | | | | It's a bit of a trade-off because we need to store copies of container metadata in each reagent (to support shape-shifting containers), and metadata is not lightweight and will get heavier. But it'll become more unambiguously useful when we switch to a compiler.
* 2889Kartik K. Agaram2016-04-301-13/+11
|
* 2888Kartik K. Agaram2016-04-301-3/+3
|
* 2887Kartik K. Agaram2016-04-301-4/+1
|
* 2882 - warn if programmer overuses transform_all()Kartik K. Agaram2016-04-281-20/+52
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This continues a line of thought sparked in commit 2831. I spent a while trying to avoid calling size_of() at transform-time, but there's no getting around the fact that translating names to addresses requires knowing how much space they need. This raised the question of what happens if the size of a container changes after a recipe using it is already transformed. I could go down the road of trying to detect such situations and redoing work, but that massively goes against the grain of my original design, which assumed that recipes don't get repeatedly transformed. Even though we call transform_all() in every test, in a non-testing run we should be loading all code and calling transform_all() just once to 'freeze-dry' everything. But even if we don't want to support multiple transforms it's worth checking that they don't occur. This commit does so in just one situation. There are likely others.
* 2879 - allow extending shape-shifting containersKartik K. Agaram2016-04-271-1/+2
|
* 2874Kartik K. Agaram2016-04-271-1/+1
| | | | | | Be more consistent that 'return' is the name of the instruction, and 'reply' just a synonym. Maybe I should take it out. It wouldn't affect the recipe/ingredient terminology while I teach..
* 2863Kartik K. Agaram2016-04-241-0/+779
| | | | | Finally after much massaging, the 'address' and 'new' layers are adjacent.
* 2821 - addresses before containersKartik K. Agaram2016-04-101-783/+0
|
* 2819Kartik K. Agaram2016-03-311-2/+2
|
* 2818Kartik K. Agaram2016-03-281-3/+2
|
* 2817Kartik K. Agaram2016-03-281-6/+2
|
* 2815Kartik K. Agaram2016-03-271-1/+1
|
* 2803Kartik K. Agaram2016-03-211-21/+21
| | | | | Show more thorough information about instructions in the trace, but keep the original form in error messages.
* 2799 - new approach to undoing changes in testsKartik K. Agaram2016-03-201-31/+2
| | | | | | | | As outlined at the end of 2797. This worked out surprisingly well. Now the snapshotting code touches fewer layers, and it's much better behaved, with less need for special-case logic, particularly inside run_interactive(). 30% slower, but should hopefully not cause any more bugs.
* 2791Kartik K. Agaram2016-03-191-2/+1
| | | | | | | Simplify 2790 by simply not computing any type->value inside parse_type_tree. It now only generates names, and it turns out the consumers handle the absence of values anyway. Now parse_type_tree no longer pollutes the Type_ordinal table with type ingredients.
* 2790Kartik K. Agaram2016-03-191-1/+2
| | | | | | | | The issue alluded to in the previous 2789 is now fixed. I'm not happy with my solution, though. I pollute Type_ordinal with type ingredients in parse_type_tree and simply ignore such entries later on. I'd much rather avoid the pollution in the first place, but I'm not sure how to do that..
* 2773 - switch to 'int'Kartik K. Agaram2016-03-131-25/+25
| | | | This should eradicate the issue of 2771.
* 2735 - define recipes using 'def'Kartik K. Agaram2016-03-081-28/+28
| | | | | | | | | | | | I'm dropping all mention of 'recipe' terminology from the Readme. That way I hope to avoid further bike-shedding discussions while I very slowly decide on the right terminology with my students. I could be smarter in my error messages and use 'recipe' when code uses it and 'function' otherwise. But what about other words like ingredient? It would all add complexity that I'm not yet sure is worthwhile. But I do want separate experiences for veteran programmers reading about Mu on github and for people learning programming using Mu.
* 2712Kartik K. Agaram2016-02-261-24/+24
|
* 2709Kartik K. Agaram2016-02-251-4/+0
| | | | | Only Hide_errors when strictly necessary. In other places let test failures directly show the unexpected error.
* 2683Kartik K. Agaram2016-02-211-1/+0
| | | | | | Ok, we don't need that check after all, because the type_ingredient_names.empty() check earlier in the layer prevents it from ever triggering.
* 2681 - drop reagent types from reagent propertiesKartik K. Agaram2016-02-211-63/+38
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | All my attempts at staging this change failed with this humongous commit that took all day and involved debugging three monstrous bugs. Two of the bugs had to do with forgetting to check the type name in the implementation of shape-shifting recipes. Bug #2 in particular would cause core tests in layer 59 to fail -- only when I loaded up edit/! It got me to just hack directly on mu.cc until I figured out the cause (snapshot saved in mu.cc.modified). The problem turned out to be that I accidentally saved a type ingredient in the Type table during specialization. Now I know that that can be very bad. I've checked the traces for any stray type numbers (rather than names). I also found what might be a bug from last November (labeled TODO), but we'll verify after this commit.
* 2678Kartik K. Agaram2016-02-201-1/+1
| | | | | | | Start using type names from the type tree rather than the property tree in most places. Hopefully the only occurrences of 'properties.at(0).second' left are ones where we're managing it. Next we can stop writing to it.
* 2677Kartik K. Agaram2016-02-201-2/+2
| | | | Include type names in the type tree. Though we aren't using them yet.
* 2671 - never use debug_string() in tracesKartik K. Agaram2016-02-191-14/+14
| | | | It's only for transient debugging.
* 2685Kartik K. Agaram2016-02-191-15/+15
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Stack of plans for cleaning up replace_type_ingredients() and a couple of other things, from main problem to subproblems: include type names in the type_tree rather than in the separate properties vector make type_tree and string_tree real cons cells, with separate leaf nodes redo the vocabulary for dumping various objects: do we really need to_string and debug_string? can we have a version with *all* information? can we have to_string not call debug_string? This commit nibbles at the edges of the final task, switching from member method syntax to global function like almost everything else. I'm mostly using methods just for STL in this project.
* 2679 - all tests passing againKartik K. Agaram2016-02-191-4/+9
| | | | | | | | | | Still not done, though: a) There's a few memory leaks to track down, including one in hash from 2668. b) replace_type_ingredients has gotten *even* uglier. I need to rethink it.
* 2670 - improvements to genericsKartik K. Agaram2016-02-181-0/+2
| | | | | | | | | | | Eliminated a few holes, gained more clarity on the shape of others. Maybe I was sleep-deprived, but this was really hard until I wrote a few unit tests directly on replace_type_ingredient. Still one flaw remaining: the type-checker isn't smart enough to handle 'merge' for all the new cases. Tests pass since we don't use those features outside C++ tests yet.