Migrate SwiftCompilerSources to FunctionConvention #70535
Conversation
atrick
force-pushed
the
function-conventions
branch
from
cd29718 to
bb2b64f
Compare
| return calleeArgumentConventions[argIdx] | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| public func calleeArgumentIndex(of index: Int) -> Int? { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
better: calleeArgumentIndex(ofOperandIndex: Int) to make it clear that the index is not an argument but the operand index
| operandConventions.convention(of: operand) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| public func calleeArgumentOperand(at calleeArgIdx: Int) -> Operand? { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The name is wrong. callee -> caller
Also we should specify the kind of index in the argument label: callerArgumentOperand(forCalleeArgumentIndex:)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
public func operand(forCalleeArgumentIndex calleeArgIdx: Int) -> Operand?
| /// ``` | ||
| func calleeArgIndex(callerArgIndex: Int) -> Int | ||
|
|
||
| /// Converts an argument index of a callee to the corresponding argument index of the apply. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you move this comment to callerArgumentOperand(forCalleeArgumentIndex:)?
| return index + 1 | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| public subscript(_ index: Int) -> ArgumentConvention { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can you rename index -> operandIndex, so that it's clear that it is not the argument index?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Done. There is still no subscript label, because it can only by used to subscript a collection of operand conventions:
operandConventions[operand.index]
Index wrapper types would also be good. I didn't want to go quite that far yet. But this PR goes a long way toward eliminating ambiguity two ways
|
atrick
force-pushed
the
function-conventions
branch
2 times, most recently
from
ce4bf7c to
f5a8001
Compare
|
@swift-ci test |
| operandConventions.convention(of: operand) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Converts an argument index of a callee to the corresponding apply operand. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you move the comment of the original callerArgIndex(calleeArgIndex: Int) here (with s/caller indices/caller operands/)? Something like
/// If the apply does not actually apply that argument, it returns nil.
///
/// Example:
/// ```
/// func callee(v, w, x, y, z) { }
/// // caller operands in %pa: -, -, c, d, e ("-" == nil)
/// // caller operands in %a: a, b, -, -, -
///
/// %pa = partial_apply @callee(c, d, e)
/// %a = apply %pa (a, b)
/// ```
f5a8001 to
8905fc9
Compare
|
@swift-ci test |
|
@swift-ci smoke test |
Layers: - FunctionConvention: AST FunctionType: results, parameters - ArgumentConventions: SIL function arguments - ApplyOperandConventions: applied operands The meaning of an integer index is determined by the collection type. All the mapping between the various indices (results, parameters, SIL argument, applied arguments) is restricted to the collection type that owns that mapping. Remove the concept of a "caller argument index".
atrick
force-pushed
the
function-conventions
branch
from
8905fc9 to
2128c21
Compare
|
@swift-ci smoke test |
Layers:
- FunctionConvention: AST FunctionType: results, parameters
- ArgumentConventions: SIL function arguments
- ApplyOperandConventions: applied operands
The meaning of an integer index is determined by the collection
type. All the mapping between the various indices (results,
parameters, SIL argument, applied arguments) is restricted to the
collection type that owns that mapping. Remove the concept of a
"caller argument index".