Skip to content

Avoid quadratic value-expression check on and/or chains - #4221

Merged
Earlopain merged 1 commit into
ruby:mainfrom
makenowjust:MakeNowJust/fix-value-expr-quadratic
Sep 5, 2026
Merged

Avoid quadratic value-expression check on and/or chains#4221
Earlopain merged 1 commit into
ruby:mainfrom
makenowjust:MakeNowJust/fix-value-expr-quadratic

Conversation

@makenowjust

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Ref https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/22294

pm_check_value_expression() descends the left operand of every and/or node.
Because pm_and_node_create and pm_or_node_create already assert the value of their left operand when the node is built, walking a left-associative chain such as a && a && ... && a re-checks the whole left spine once per operator, which is quadratic in the length of the chain.

The left operand of an existing and/or node was therefore already checked, so stop at the node instead of descending.
This makes the check linear.
The only observable change is that a void value on the left branch of a chain is now reported once, at the innermost node where it is created, rather than once per enclosing operator; the errors fixture that pinned the duplicate is updated to match.

pm_check_value_expression descended the left operand of every and/or
node it visited. Because pm_and_node_create and pm_or_node_create
already assert the value of their left operand when the node is built,
walking a left-associative chain such as `a && a && ... && a`
re-checked the whole left spine once per operator, which is quadratic
in the length of the chain: 16k operators took seconds.

The left operand of an existing and/or node was therefore already
checked, so stop at the node instead of descending. This makes the
check linear. The only observable change is that a void value on the
left spine of a chain is now reported once, at the innermost node
where it is created, rather than once per enclosing operator; the
errors fixture that pinned the duplicate is updated to match.
@@ -1,6 +1,5 @@
t next&&do end&=
^~ unexpected 'do'; expected an expression after the operator
^~~~ unexpected void value expression

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

parse.y still reports this duplicated warning, but it is redundant; I'll open a pull request to fix it for parse.y too.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@Earlopain Earlopain left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nice, thanks.

BTW, you can do Prism.profile to get a more accurate number for just the parse step.

@Earlopain
Earlopain merged commit b19a0a5 into ruby:main Sep 5, 2026
110 checks passed
matzbot pushed a commit to ruby/ruby that referenced this pull request Sep 5, 2026
(ruby/prism#4221)

Ref https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/22294

pm_check_value_expression descended the left operand of every and/or
node it visited. Because pm_and_node_create and pm_or_node_create
already assert the value of their left operand when the node is built,
walking a left-associative chain such as `a && a && ... && a`
re-checked the whole left spine once per operator, which is quadratic
in the length of the chain: 16k operators took seconds.

The left operand of an existing and/or node was therefore already
checked, so stop at the node instead of descending. This makes the
check linear. The only observable change is that a void value on the
left spine of a chain is now reported once, at the innermost node
where it is created, rather than once per enclosing operator; the
errors fixture that pinned the duplicate is updated to match.

ruby/prism@b19a0a5bc0
@makenowjust
makenowjust deleted the MakeNowJust/fix-value-expr-quadratic branch September 5, 2026 09:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants