-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 255
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Fix issue #2932 (allow speculative nested variables) #2940
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ | ||
// RUN: %ldc -c -allinst %s | ||
|
||
import std.algorithm; | ||
|
||
extern __gshared int[] array; | ||
|
||
void funcWithNoFrame() | ||
{ | ||
int local; | ||
// lambda is codegen'd | ||
pragma(msg, typeof(array.map!(e => local))); | ||
} | ||
|
||
void funcWithFrame() | ||
{ | ||
int capturedVar, local; | ||
int nestedFunc() { return capturedVar; } | ||
// lambda is codegen'd with `-allinst` | ||
static assert(__traits(compiles, array.map!(e => local))); | ||
} |
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Unsure as to whether
null
orundefined
makes more sense here.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If you don't expect it to be used (or only from unused code), I'd use
undef
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Heh yeah, those functions shouldn't be called, but we could just as well have a bug somewhere leading to this, where we wouldn't bail out anymore. I now lean more towards
null
for deterministic segfaults; e.g., thestd.random
2.084 issue (undef
initial seed) was only noticeable on 32-bit Linux.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Using
null
would not guarantee segfaults, but it clearly defines accessing it as UB (unless with"null-pointer-is-valid"=true
, but that would then result in segfaulting). I don't think that dereferencingundef
is UB in LLVM IR. So I too thinknull
is the better choice here (optimizer can perhaps also use it e.g to remove dead code).There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Makes sense