Posted on 2nd of April 2024
| 550 wordsIn the domain of C++ optimization, we encounter two key players: Return Value
Optimization (RVO) and Named Return Value Optimization (NRVO). These techniques
excel in simplifying function returns by avoiding unnecessary object copies or
moves, akin to a direct transfer from temporary to destination.
Looking at the example:
class Object {
public:
Object() { std::cout << "Construct at " << this << "\n"; };
~Object() { std::cout << "Destruct at " << this << "\n"; };
Object(const Object &) { std::cout << "Const Copy at " << this << "\n"; };
Object(Object &&) { std::cout << "Move at " << this << "\n"; };
Object &operator=(const Object &) {
std::cout << "Const Copy Assignment at " << this << "\n";
return *this;
};
Object &operator=(Object &&) {
std::cout << "Move Assignment at " << this << "\n";
return *this;
};
};Object TestRVO() { return Object{}; }
Object TestNRVO() {
Object obj;
return obj;
}
Object obj = TestRVO();
Object obj2 = TestNRVO();Since C++17, Return Value Optimization (RVO) has been governed, and the moment
when a constructor is invoked is termed “materialization”. C++17 specifies that
materialization should be delayed as much as possible, typically until it binds
to references or until a class’s member is accessed using the dot operator, or
until an array is subscripted using square brackets or converted to a pointer.
Alternatively, materialization occurs when the value is ultimately discarded,
ensuring that at least one temporary is created. On the other hand, Named Return
Value Optimization (NRVO) lacks regulation but is commonly implemented by
proficient compilers.
RVO and NRVO can be disabled under certain circumstances, such as conditional
returns (if(xx) return x; else return y;), returning a function parameter or
global variable instead of a local variable, or returning a non-id-expression.
This explains why using std::move(id) is discouraged when NRVO is available.
In scenarios where RVO/NRVO is applicable, no move operations are triggered.
Conversely, in their absence, move operations become inevitable. Another
optimization step occurs where the compiler attempts to interpret an
id-expression as an xvalue. Consequently, return x; is equivalent to
return std::move(x);, obviating the need for copying.
For example:
struct S {
S() = default;
S(const S &) = delete;
S(S &&) { std::cout << "here;"; };
~S() = default;
};
// NRVO happens, no move at all.
S foo() {
S s;
return s;
}
// BAD, NRVO can happen, but it's disabled, so move ctor is called.
S bar() {
S s;
return std::move(s);
}
// NRVO is disabled due to conditional return; however, the subsequent
// optimization ensures no unnecessary copy is made.
S foofoo(bool use) {
S obj1, obj2;
if (use)
return obj1;
return obj2;
}
// Similar to the previous function, but redundant std::move calls are added
// unnecessarily.
S barbar(bool use) {
S obj1, obj2;
if (use)
return std::move(obj1);
return std::move(obj2);
}When NRVO and RVO optimizations fail, a copy operation ensues. In such cases,
manual move operations are required if moving is preferred. Note that t.s isn’t
considered an id-expression, hence both optimizations fail, necessitating
explicit move calls like std::move(t.s) or std::move(t).s.
The subsequent optimization, officially known as implicit move, is a feature
anticipated in C++23. Before its introduction, implicit moves are subject to
stricter constraints compared to id-expressions.
Complexity of C++ never ceases to amaze me.
Posted on 2nd of February 2024
| 599 wordsSomebody contacted me and mentioned that there is something off with my RSS
feeds, thanks for that. I don’t know what had happened and when, but for some
reason my normal RSS link.
Didn’t contain the correct
information. It seemed to only contain the summary of the post. I recently did
some overhaul in my own Hugo theme and its layouts so most likely I had put
something to wrong place while doing that causing this.
When I started looking at what Hugo generated, it seemed that the correct feed
was actually located at the root of my site, so topikettunen.com/feed.xml
but this isn’t right. I remember making it so at one point that I only
generate the feed in the blog section since - personally speaking - I don’t
really see the benefit of generating the feed elsewhere.
This seemed to be caused by error in my Hugo configs, which most likely I had
accidentally changed at some point. I had to add the following to my
config.toml:
[outputs]
home = ["HTML"]
section = ["HTML", "RSS"]
taxonomy = ["HTML"]
This makes it so that Hugo generates only HTML when it comes to home and
taxonomy page (so archive
and tag
for me). In section,
like blog
, it’ll generate HTML and RSS. So that was fixed.
Like I mentioned above, the RSS feed generated under section was still wrong
since it only contained the summary. In my Hugo theme, I had already created a
custom layouts/index.rss.xml in there with the change:
-<description>{{ .Summary | html }}</description>
+<description>{{ .Content | safeHTML }}</description>So that it’ll generate the whole content in there instead of summary, which
Hugo does by default. Unfortunately, this was one was in the wrong place for
section RSS. It should be in layouts/section/section.rss.xml, and then it
works fine!
Also having full content under description in the RSS XML seems quite odd so
I fixed it to look like:
<description>{{ .Summary | html }}</description>
<content:encoded>{{ .Content | html }}</content:encoded>To have both in their own correct fields.
I also noticed that my custom notice shortcode looked quite ugly in the RSS
feed. The way I had done this shortcode was the having the following in
layouts/shortcodes/notice.html:
<table class="notice">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>
{{ .Inner }}
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>I know, this probably could be done with something else than table, but hey,
I’m not a designer.
Which I then would call in my Markdown files like:
{{< notice >}}
<strong>Plug</strong>: <a href="https://git.sr.ht/~tok/sila" target="_blank">Follow the Sila development here.</a>
{{< /notice >}}Also while writing this, I learned how to escape shortcodes in Hugo in case
you want to use them in write them in your Markdown, but not actually use
them. You need wrap the short code inside {{</* notice */>}}.
But unfortunately it would just generate that in the beginning of the RSS
content without proper HTML tags etc. So instead of using the notice as a
shortcode, I removed the shortcodes from Markdown and just added the following
to my layouts/_default/single.html:
{{ if in .Params.tag "sila"}}
<table class="notice">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>
<strong>Plug</strong>: <a href="https://git.sr.ht/~tok/sila" target="_blank">Follow the Sila development here.</a>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
{{ end }}This only works when blog has a tag sila in it. Of course, if I would like
to use such a notice in some other posts, this wouldn’t work, but for now,
it’s good enough for me. This way also Hugo doesn’t include the notice in the
generated RSS, making the feed look little bit neater!
But hey, at least now the RSS feed should be working how it should!
Posted on 27th of January 2024
| 2526 wordsHave had a small pause on programming and writing due to vacations etc., but
fortunately, now I’m back to normal schedule, so I’ll try to get back to it as
much as possible!
I recently wrote about implementing local
variables
to my compiler and next I
would like to write about implementing the initial control flow to it. With
the initial control flow, I mean stuff like loops and conditionals in a
relatively simple fashion for now.
Starting with simple conditionals. In my language I’ve decided to go with the
usual if and else just not to over-complicate things for me. Starting with
the required assembly code. Considering code like:
if 1 == 0 { return 1; } return 0;Nothing too complicated going on. Of course in that, it would never return 1,
but let’s not focus on that for now. Assembly for something like this (with
the function prologue and epilogue) would look something like this:
; Prologue
push %rbp
mov %rsp, %rbp
sub $0, %rsp
mov $0, %rax ; Move the value 0 into the register %rax.
push %rax ; Push the value of %rax onto the stack.
mov $1, %rax ; Move the value 1 into the register %rax.
pop %rdi ; Pop the topmost value from the stack and store it in the %rdi register.
cmp %rdi, %rax ; Compare the values in %rdi and %rax.
sete %al ; Set the least significant byte of the register %rax to 1 if the previous comparison was equal, otherwise, set it to 0.
movzb %al, %rax ; Zero-extend %al (the least significant byte) to the entire %rax register.
cmp $0, %rax ; Compare the value in %rax with 0.
je .L.else.1 ; Jump to .L.else.1 if the zero flag is set (if the previous comparison resulted in equality).
.L.else.1: ; Label for the else block.
nop ; No operation (this instruction does nothing).
.L.end.1: ; Label for the end of the code block.
mov $0, %rax ; Move the value 0 into %rax.
; Epilogue
mov %rbp, %rsp
pop %rbp
ret
This probably could be written more cleanly but for now I’m not
too worried about code generation optimizations, so I let future Topi worry
about those.
In the last part, where we focused on implementing our local
variables
, I already added support for
doing tokenization for our keywords that are required for the control flow. So
when it comes to lexer, everything should already be in order.
Parser on the other hand requires little bit of work. First, let’s implement
structures for conditionals:
(defstruct (ast-node-cond
(:include ast-node)
(:copier nil))
(expr (util:required 'expr) :type t :read-only t)
(then (util:required 'then) :type t :read-only t)
(else (util:required 'else) :type t :read-only t))
(defmethod next-node ((node ast-node-cond))
(ast-node-cond-next node))For now, conditionals will be parsed as a statement node, so we’ll need add
cases for conditional keywords in our parse-statement-node:
(defun parse-statement-node (tok)
(alexandria:switch ((lex:token-value tok) :test #'string=)
#| [...] |#
("if"
(parse-cond-statement-node (lex:token-next tok)))
#| [...] |#))parse-cond-statement-node on the other hand looks something like this:
(defun parse-cond-statement-node (tok)
;; TOK passed in should be the token after "if".
(let (expr then else)
(multiple-value-bind (expr-node rest)
(parse-expression-node tok)
(setf expr expr-node
tok rest))
(multiple-value-bind (then-node rest)
(parse-statement-node tok)
(setf then then-node
tok rest))
(when (string= (lex:token-value tok) "else")
(multiple-value-bind (else-node rest)
(parse-statement-node (lex:token-next tok))
(setf else else-node
tok rest)))
(values (make-ast-node-cond :expr expr
:then then
:else else)
tok)))So we’ll parse the conditional out of
if <cond> { <then-node> } else { <else-node> }and proceed to parse the bodies inside curly braces. Parsing of
the bodies of the conditional proceed down in a recursive descent manner how
we have implemented the parses earlier.
To be able to produce somewhat similar assembly as I wrote above, naturally,
the code generation needs some work:
(defun generate-statement (node)
(let ((insts (make-inst-array)))
(cond
#| [...] |#
((parser:ast-node-cond-p node)
(incf *label-count*)
(let ((count *label-count*))
(do-vector-push-inst (generate-expression
(parser:ast-node-cond-expr node)) insts)
(vector-push-extend "cmp $0, %rax" insts)
(vector-push-extend (format nil "je .L.else.~d" count) insts)
(do-vector-push-inst (generate-statement
(parser:ast-node-cond-then node)) insts)
(vector-push-extend (format nil "jmp .L.end.~d" count) insts)
(vector-push-extend (format nil ".L.else.~d:" count) insts)
(if (parser:ast-node-cond-else node)
(do-vector-push-inst (generate-statement
(parser:ast-node-cond-else node)) insts)
(vector-push-extend "nop" insts))
(vector-push-extend (format nil ".L.end.~d:" count) insts)
(unless (parser:next-node node)
(vector-push-extend "nop" insts)))
insts)
#| [...] |#)))Essentially what is happening here is that we compare the conditional in the
given statement to 0 and if or not comparison is true, we’ll jump to a label
.L.else.<label no> or we just skip it and proceed forward to instructions
generated from the “then” node. Label numbering is naturally for the reason
that pretty much always in real programs functions might have multitude of
different conditional in varying levels of nesting. So we need to keep track
of which conditional is in question at this point.
But when it comes to initial implementation of conditionals, that should be
more or less it and we can proceed on to implementing loops.
Loops in many way works similarly to how conditionals were implemented above,
since you often have conditionals e.g. in “for” loops. In assembly, how
something like this would be implemented is basically the same as above, but
in the end, we would just jump back to the beginning depending of the
conditional of the loop itself.
So code something like
{ for ;; { return 3; } return 5; }would equal to code like:
.globl main
main:
push %rbp
mov %rsp, %rbp
sub $0, %rsp
.L.begin.1:
mov $3, %rax
jmp .L.return
jmp .L.begin.1
.L.end.1:
mov $5, %rax
jmp .L.return
.L.return:
mov %rbp, %rsp
pop %rbp
ret
Or little bit more complex for loop
{ i:=0; j:=0;for i:=0; i<=10; i:=i+1 { j:= i+j; } return j; }would equal to:
.globl main
main:
push %rbp
mov %rsp, %rbp
sub $16, %rsp
lea -16(%rbp), %rax
push %rax
mov $0, %rax
pop %rdi
mov %rax, (%rdi)
lea -8(%rbp), %rax
push %rax
mov $0, %rax
pop %rdi
mov %rax, (%rdi)
lea -16(%rbp), %rax
push %rax
mov $0, %rax
pop %rdi
mov %rax, (%rdi)
.L.begin.1:
mov $10, %rax
push %rax
lea -16(%rbp), %rax
mov (%rax), %rax
pop %rdi
cmp %rdi, %rax
setle %al
movzb %al, %rax
cmp $0, %rax
je .L.end.1
lea -8(%rbp), %rax
push %rax
lea -8(%rbp), %rax
mov (%rax), %rax
push %rax
lea -16(%rbp), %rax
mov (%rax), %rax
pop %rdi
add %rdi, %rax
pop %rdi
mov %rax, (%rdi)
lea -16(%rbp), %rax
push %rax
mov $1, %rax
push %rax
lea -16(%rbp), %rax
mov (%rax), %rax
pop %rdi
add %rdi, %rax
pop %rdi
mov %rax, (%rdi)
jmp .L.begin.1
.L.end.1:
lea -8(%rbp), %rax
mov (%rax), %rax
jmp .L.return
.L.return:
mov %rbp, %rsp
pop %rbp
ret
Again, let’s start by adding structures for our loops:
(defstruct (ast-node-for
(:include ast-node)
(:copier nil))
(init (util:required 'init) :type t :read-only t)
(inc (util:required 'inc) :type t :read-only t)
(cond (util:required 'cond) :type t :read-only t)
(body (util:required 'body) :type t :read-only t))
(defmethod next-node ((node ast-node-for))
(ast-node-for-next node))
(defstruct (ast-node-loop
(:include ast-node)
(:copier nil))
(body (util:required 'body) :type t :read-only t))
(defmethod next-node ((node ast-node-loop))
(ast-node-loop-next node))
(defstruct (ast-node-break
(:include ast-node)
(:copier nil))
(depth (util:required 'depth) :type integer :read-only t))
(defmethod next-node ((node ast-node-break))
(ast-node-break-next node))I’ve included ast-node-loop in here, which in my language depicts while
loop. Similarly to e.g. Rust.
Parsing loops will similarly to conditionals happen in parse-statement-node
which in current state looks fully something like this:
(defvar *break-depth* 0
"Depth counter for BREAK keyword to know from what level it should break out.")
(defun parse-statement-node (tok)
(alexandria:switch ((lex:token-value tok) :test #'string=)
("return"
(multiple-value-bind (node rest)
(parse-expression-node (lex:token-next tok))
(values (make-ast-node-return :expr node)
(lex:token-next (skip-to-token ";" rest)))))
("if"
(parse-cond-statement-node (lex:token-next tok)))
("for"
(parse-for-statement-node (lex:token-next tok)))
("loop"
(parse-loop-statement-node (lex:token-next tok)))
("break"
(values (make-ast-node-break :depth *break-depth*)
(lex:token-next (skip-to-token ";" tok))))
("{"
(parse-compound-statement-node (lex:token-next tok)))
(otherwise
(parse-expression-statement-node tok))))Notice the *break-depth* variable, that’ll work in similar fashion as our
label counter in the code generation for conditionals.
Parsing functions for our loop keywords looks like this:
(defun parse-for-statement-node (tok)
;; TOK passed in should be the token after "for"
(let (init cond inc body)
(multiple-value-bind (init-node rest)
(parse-expression-statement-node tok)
(setf init init-node
tok rest))
(unless (string= (lex:token-value tok) ";")
(multiple-value-bind (cond-node rest)
(parse-expression-node tok)
(setf cond cond-node
tok rest)))
(setf tok (skip-to-token ";" tok))
;; Entering "for" scope.
(incf *break-depth*)
(unless (string= (lex:token-value (lex:token-next tok)) "{")
(multiple-value-bind (inc-node rest)
(parse-expression-node (lex:token-next tok))
(setf inc inc-node
tok rest)))
(setf tok (skip-to-token "{" tok))
(multiple-value-bind (body-node rest)
(parse-statement-node tok)
(setf body body-node
tok rest))
;; Left "for" scope.
(decf *break-depth*)
(values (make-ast-node-for :init init
:cond cond
:inc inc
:body body)
tok)))
(defun parse-loop-statement-node (tok)
;; TOK passed in should be the opening brace of the block after the "loop"
;; keyword.
;; TODO(topi): Add proper error handling.
(assert (string= (lex:token-value tok) "{"))
;; Entering "loop" scope.
(incf *break-depth*)
(multiple-value-bind (body rest)
(parse-statement-node tok)
;; Left "loop" scope.
(decf *break-depth*)
(values (make-ast-node-loop :body body)
rest)))So as you can see, parsing loops work in a very similar fashion to how
conditionals are parsed since the structure for the syntax is quite similar.
Same also applies to code generation so our generate-statement currently
fully looks like this:
(defun generate-statement (node)
(let ((insts (make-inst-array)))
(cond
((parser:ast-node-block-p node)
(loop :for body := (parser:ast-node-block-body node)
:then (setf body (parser:next-node body))
:until (null body)
:do (do-vector-push-inst (generate-statement body) insts))
insts)
((parser:ast-node-return-p node)
(do-vector-push-inst (generate-expression
(parser:ast-node-return-expr node)) insts)
(vector-push-extend "jmp .L.return" insts)
insts)
((parser:ast-node-break-p node)
(vector-push-extend (format nil "jmp .L.end.~d"
(parser:ast-node-break-depth node)) insts)
insts)
((parser:ast-node-cond-p node)
(incf *label-count*)
(let ((count *label-count*))
(do-vector-push-inst (generate-expression
(parser:ast-node-cond-expr node)) insts)
(vector-push-extend "cmp $0, %rax" insts)
(vector-push-extend (format nil "je .L.else.~d" count) insts)
(do-vector-push-inst (generate-statement
(parser:ast-node-cond-then node)) insts)
(vector-push-extend (format nil "jmp .L.end.~d" count) insts)
(vector-push-extend (format nil ".L.else.~d:" count) insts)
(if (parser:ast-node-cond-else node)
(do-vector-push-inst (generate-statement
(parser:ast-node-cond-else node)) insts)
(vector-push-extend "nop" insts))
(vector-push-extend (format nil ".L.end.~d:" count) insts)
(unless (parser:next-node node)
(vector-push-extend "nop" insts)))
insts)
((parser:ast-node-for-p node)
(incf *label-count*)
(let ((count *label-count*))
(do-vector-push-inst (generate-statement
(parser:ast-node-for-init node)) insts)
(vector-push-extend (format nil ".L.begin.~d:" count) insts)
(when (parser:ast-node-for-cond node)
(do-vector-push-inst (generate-expression
(parser:ast-node-for-cond node)) insts)
(vector-push-extend "cmp $0, %rax" insts)
(vector-push-extend (format nil "je .L.end.~d" count) insts))
(do-vector-push-inst (generate-statement
(parser:ast-node-for-body node)) insts)
(when (parser:ast-node-for-inc node)
(do-vector-push-inst (generate-expression
(parser:ast-node-for-inc node)) insts))
(vector-push-extend (format nil "jmp .L.begin.~d" count) insts)
(vector-push-extend (format nil ".L.end.~d:" count) insts)
(unless (parser:next-node node)
(vector-push-extend "nop" insts)))
insts)
((parser:ast-node-loop-p node)
(incf *label-count*)
(let ((count *label-count*))
(vector-push-extend (format nil ".L.begin.~d:" count) insts)
(do-vector-push-inst (generate-statement
(parser:ast-node-loop-body node)) insts)
(vector-push-extend (format nil "jmp .L.begin.~d" count) insts)
(vector-push-extend (format nil ".L.end.~d:" count) insts)
(unless (parser:next-node node)
(vector-push-extend "nop" insts)))
insts)
((parser:ast-node-expression-p node)
(do-vector-push-inst (generate-expression
(parser:ast-node-expression-expr node)) insts)
insts))))Mainly the difference between loops and conditionals is just the label
.L.begin.<label no> which we use in case we want to jump back to the
beginning of the loop with jmp .L.begin.<label no>.
And that’s about it! I have already implemented tests for these and they
should now be be passing!
Testing System sila/tests
;; testing 'sila/tests/compiler'
test-compilation-and-compare-rc
Integer
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ return 0; }" 0) to be true. (1013ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ ;;;;; return 1; }" 1) to be true. (1018ms)
Arithmetics
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ return 5 + 40 - 20; }" 25) to be true. (1022ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ return 2 / (1 + 1) * 8; }" 8) to be true. (1015ms)
Unary
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ return - -10; }" 10) to be true. (1011ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ return -10+20; }" 10) to be true. (1022ms)
Comparisons
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ return 0==1; }" 0) to be true. (1023ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ return 1!=1; }" 0) to be true. (1067ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ return 0==0; }" 1) to be true. (1059ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ return 1!=0; }" 1) to be true. (1059ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ return 0<1; }" 1) to be true. (1061ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ return 1<1; }" 0) to be true. (1087ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ return 1<=1; }" 1) to be true. (1042ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ return 2<=1; }" 0) to be true. (1055ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ return 0<1; }" 1) to be true. (1021ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ return 1<1; }" 0) to be true. (1014ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ return 1>=1; }" 1) to be true. (1025ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ return 1>=2; }" 0) to be true. (1014ms)
Multiple statements
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ return 1; 2; 3; }" 1) to be true. (1019ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ 1; return 2; 3; }" 2) to be true. (1023ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ 1; 2; return 3; }" 3) to be true. (1031ms)
Variables
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ a:=8; return a; }" 8) to be true. (1043ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ a:=3; b:=5; return a+b; }" 8) to be true. (1024ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ foo:=3; bar:=5; return foo+bar; }" 8) to be true. (1032ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC
"{ foo2:=3; bar2:=5; return foo2+bar2; }" 8) to be true. (1056ms)
Block
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ 1; { 2; } return 3; }" 3) to be true. (1070ms)
Conditionals
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ if 1 { return 1; } return 2; }" 1) to be true. (1085ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC
"{ if 0 { return 1; } else { return 2; } }" 2) to be true. (1077ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC
"{ if 1<0 { return 1; } else { return 2; } }" 2) to be true. (1024ms)
For loop
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ for ;; { return 3; } return 5; }" 3) to be true. (1011ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC
"{ i:=0; j:=0;for i:=0; i<=10; i:=i+1 {j := i+j;} return j; }" 55) to be true. (1019ms)
Loop
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC "{ loop { return 3; } return 5; }" 3) to be true. (1046ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC
"{ i := 0; loop { i := 3; break; } return i; }" 3) to be true. (1030ms)
✓ Expect (COMPILE-PROGRAM-AND-COMPARE-RC
"{ i := 0; loop { i := i + 1; if i == 10 { break; } } return i; }" 10) to be true. (1038ms)
;; testing 'sila/tests/codegen'
test-codegen-x86-64
Integer
✓ { return 0; }
✓ { return 42; }
Add and subtraction
✓ { return 5+20-4; }
✓ { return 5 + 20 - 4 ; }
Division and multiplication
✓ { return 2 / (1 + 1) * 8; }
Unary
✓ { return - -10; }
✓ { return -10+20; }
✓ { return - - -10; }
Comparison
✓ { return 1==1; }
✓ { return 1>=1; }
✓ { return 1<=1; }
✓ { return 1<1; }
✓ { return 1>1; }
Multiple statements
✓ { return 1;2;3; }
✓ { 1;return 2;3; }
✓ { 1;2;return 3; }
Variables
✓ { a:=8;return a; }
✓ { foo:=5;bar:=8;return foo+bar; }
Block
✓ { 1; { 2; } return 3; }
Conditional
✓ { if 1 == 0 { return 1; } return 0; }
✓ { if 0 { return 1; } else { return 2; } }
For loop
✓ { for ;; { return 3; } return 5; }
✓ { i:=0; j:=0;for i:=0; i<=10; i:=i+1 {j := i+j;} return j; }
✓ 1 test completed
Summary:
All 1 test passed.