[move-compiler-v2] add parser code for lambda types #14792

brmataptos · 2024-09-28T04:44:57Z

Description

Extend syntax

lambda expression: move |args| body with copy+store. Note that:
- we don't use has copy, store because commas will confuse parsing in many situation
- we don't use has copy+store because that leads to nonuniform syntax with has
- at some point Wolfgang suggested with, so that's what we're using.
function types: |T1, T2| T3 with copy+store
curry construction:
- from lambda: |a, b| f(x, 3, a, b)
- to simplify review, EarlyBind expression now takes a function-valued expression and a set of argument expressions, which correspond to a prefix of the function parameters.
arbitrary function calls:
- (|x, y| x + y)(2, 3)
suppress printing common abilities (all functions have drop)

Modify exp_builder and lambda_lifter to generate function values.

Modify model to track "used" functions in addition to "called" functions to be able to catch all dependencies when function values are created but not called.

Attaches an AbilitySet to Type::Fun and Exp::Lambda based on source. Adds a new ExpCall operation in parser/expansion ASTs to be able to carry more generalized function calls through to move-model, which already can support this through Invoke, which previously was underutilized. Added basic type checking for function abilities.

Current Gaps

I was targeting the test cases return_func.move and doable_func.move, but this PR is still missing

inference of ability store for function values built by curry with only storable parameters
allowing storable function types as type parameters and function returns

I will try to patch those in while this is being reviewed, or add them to a later PR.

How Has This Been Tested?

Added more lambda tests under move-compiler-v2/tests/lambda/ which are run "with" and "without" lambda features enabled. Currently, many things pass through to hit "not yet implemented" errors in bytecode gen, etc.

Ran and carefully checked all tests under third_party and aptos.

Key Areas to Review

Key features are illustrated in test move-compiler-v2/tests/lambda/storable/doable_func.move and the two corresponding output files, along with the test return_func.move in the same directory. Most other test outputs should be largely unchanged, although error messages related to lambda use in default configuration have changed.

Tricky features are:

parser is modified for lambda syntax extensions.
In some cases, abilities may not be inferred well yet, so examples may need to be over-annotated with abilities.
in ty.rs: unification checks Fun abilities as well as other things.
in lambda_lifter.rs, we (1) reject lambdas without move free-var handling, (2) try to reduce lambda to curry, by checking for a simple function call with simple args, the last of which are identical to the lambda parameters.

Type of Change

Which Components or Systems Does This Change Impact?

Checklist

I have read and followed the CONTRIBUTING doc
I have performed a self-review of my own code
I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
I identified and added all stakeholders and component owners affected by this change as reviewers
I tested both happy and unhappy path of the functionality
I have made corresponding changes to the documentation

trunk-io · 2024-09-28T04:45:00Z

⏱️ 2h 37m total CI duration on this PR

Slowest 15 Jobs	Cumulative Duration	Recent Runs
rust-move-unit-coverage	17m	🟩
rust-cargo-deny	15m	🟩 🟩 🟩 🟩 🟩 (+4 more)
rust-move-tests	13m	🟥
general-lints	12m	🟩 🟩 🟩 🟩 🟩 (+4 more)
rust-move-unit-coverage	12m	🟩
rust-move-unit-coverage	11m	🟩
rust-move-tests	10m	🟩
rust-move-tests	9m	🟩
check-dynamic-deps	8m	🟩 🟩 🟩 🟩 🟩 (+4 more)
rust-move-tests	8m	🟥
rust-move-unit-coverage	5m	🟥
rust-move-unit-coverage	4m	🟥
rust-move-unit-coverage	4m	🟥
rust-move-unit-coverage	4m	🟥
rust-move-unit-coverage	3m	🟥

_{settings ⋅ feedback ⋅ docs ⋅ learn more about trunk.io}

brmataptos · 2024-09-28T04:45:13Z

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

codecov · 2024-09-28T04:56:41Z

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 79.67290% with 87 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Please upload report for BASE (09-27-extend_parser_for_lambda_types@243ea0f). Learn more about missing BASE report.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
third_party/move/move-compiler/src/parser/ast.rs	24.2%	25 Missing ⚠️
...hird_party/move/move-compiler/src/expansion/ast.rs	25.0%	24 Missing ⚠️
third_party/move/move-model/src/exp_rewriter.rs	55.8%	15 Missing ⚠️
third_party/move/move-model/src/ty.rs	56.5%	10 Missing ⚠️
third_party/move/move-model/src/ast.rs	50.0%	7 Missing ⚠️
...arty/move/move-compiler/src/expansion/translate.rs	96.2%	4 Missing ⚠️
...piler-v2/src/env_pipeline/unused_params_checker.rs	92.3%	1 Missing ⚠️
...d_party/move/move-model/src/builder/exp_builder.rs	98.4%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@                           Coverage Diff                           @@
##             09-27-extend_parser_for_lambda_types   #14792   +/-   ##
=======================================================================
  Coverage                                        ?    59.9%           
=======================================================================
  Files                                           ?      852           
  Lines                                           ?   207826           
  Branches                                        ?        0           
=======================================================================
  Hits                                            ?   124528           
  Misses                                          ?    83298           
  Partials                                        ?        0

Flag	Coverage Δ
	`59.9% <79.6%> (?)`

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

third_party/move/move-binary-format/src/file_format.rs

third_party/move/move-compiler-v2/src/env_pipeline/function_checker.rs

rahxephon89 · 2024-11-23T00:09:00Z

third_party/move/move-model/src/ast.rs

@@ -1739,6 +1814,12 @@ impl ExpRewriterFunctions for LoopNestRewriter {
 #[derive(Debug, Clone, PartialEq, Eq, Hash)]
 pub enum Operation {
    MoveFunction(ModuleId, FunId),
+    /// Build a closure by binding 1 or more leading arguments to a function value.
+    /// First argument to the operation must be a function; the reamining


nit: reaming -> remaining

vineethk

Submitting what I have as I saw some updates to the PR last night. Will continue reviewing.

vineethk · 2024-11-25T01:23:27Z

third_party/move/move-compiler/src/shared/ast_debug.rs

-///             fields,
-///         } = self;
-///         ...
+///     impl AstDebug for StructDefinition {


nit: unnecessary whitespace change?

vineethk · 2024-11-25T01:25:19Z

third_party/move/move-compiler/src/parser/syntax.rs

@@ -1901,9 +1902,35 @@ fn at_start_of_exp(context: &mut Context) -> bool {
    )
 }

+// Parse the rest of a lambda expression, after already processing any capture designator (move/copy).


Would be nice to have the (pseudo) grammar documented, similar to other parse_* functions around here.

vineethk · 2024-11-25T01:32:17Z

third_party/move/move-compiler/src/parser/syntax.rs

+    } else {
+        // token is Tok::PipePipe, i.e., empty bind list in this context.
+        consume_token(context.tokens, Tok::PipePipe)?;
+        spanned(context.tokens.file_hash(), start_loc, start_loc + 1, vec![])


Is start_loc + 1 the correct value for end (because "||" is 2 chars)?

I guess so. This code was just moved up from parse_exp.

@brmataptos I don't think this is correct. If you see other usages, end is context.tokens.previous_end_loc() (and this is start_loc + len of token).

So we should either make this start_loc + 2 or use context.tokens.previous_end_loc() like elsewhere.

vineethk · 2024-11-25T01:43:06Z

third_party/move/move-compiler/src/parser/syntax.rs

+    };
+    let body = Box::new(parse_exp(context)?);
+    let abilities_start = context.tokens.start_loc();
+    let abilities = parse_with_abilities(context)?;


Could you please add a test where we use has instead of with for declaring abilities of a lambda (which I expect would be a common mistake to do, given all our previous ability declarations were with has)?

Ok, added lambda/storable/parse_errors.move to put some parse errors like this.

vineethk · 2024-11-25T01:44:46Z

third_party/move/move-compiler/src/parser/syntax.rs

+    if !abilities.is_empty() {
+        let abilities_end = context.tokens.previous_end_loc();
+        let loc = make_loc(context.tokens.file_hash(), abilities_start, abilities_end);
+        require_move_2(context, loc, "Abilities on function expressions");


We would want to gate this with a higher language version (not just 2.0), say 2.2 at least (2.1 is the current stable language version).

Changed to 2.2

vineethk · 2024-11-25T02:29:29Z

third_party/move/move-compiler/src/parser/syntax.rs

@@ -2209,6 +2250,10 @@ fn parse_dot_or_index_chain(context: &mut Context) -> Result<Exp, Box<Diagnostic
                consume_token(context.tokens, Tok::RBracket)?;
                exp
            },
+            Tok::LParen => {
+                let args = parse_call_args(context)?;
+                Exp_::ExpCall(Box::new(lhs), args)


Could you please add some tests where we mix dot/index chains with call expressions? func_vector[0]() etc.

Added some tests to registry_ok.move to illustrate.

These will not run due to reentrancy, but are ok for now.

vineethk · 2024-11-25T02:30:01Z

third_party/move/move-compiler/src/parser/syntax.rs

@@ -2443,11 +2488,18 @@ fn parse_type(context: &mut Context) -> Result<Type, Box<Diagnostic>> {
                    Type_::Unit,
                )
            };
+            let abilities_start = context.tokens.start_loc();


Update doc string.

vineethk · 2024-11-25T02:30:55Z

third_party/move/move-compiler/src/parser/syntax.rs

+            if !abilities.is_empty() {
+                let abilities_end = context.tokens.previous_end_loc();
+                let loc = make_loc(context.tokens.file_hash(), abilities_start, abilities_end);
+                require_move_2(context, loc, "Ability constraints on function types");


Lang version at least 2.2 instead of 2.0.

vineethk · 2024-11-25T13:17:58Z

third_party/move/move-compiler/src/parser/syntax.rs

+// Parse an optional "with" type constraint:
+//      WithAbilities =
+//          ( "with" <Ability> (+ <Ability>)* )?
+fn parse_with_abilities(context: &mut Context) -> Result<Vec<Ability>, Box<Diagnostic>> {


In the PR description (at the very beginning), it says syntax is extended with the following: move |args| body with copy, store. But it looks like we use + (not ,) as the separator for abilities in both lambda expressions and types. Just double checking that this is what is intended and the PR description was a typo.

Fixed the PR description.

vineethk · 2024-11-25T13:22:45Z

third_party/move/move-compiler/src/parser/ast.rs

@@ -689,7 +717,7 @@ pub enum Exp_ {
    // { seq }
    Block(Sequence),
    // | x1 [: t1], ..., xn [: tn] | e
-    Lambda(TypedBindList, Box<Exp>),
+    Lambda(TypedBindList, Box<Exp>, LambdaCaptureKind, Vec<Ability>),


update comment above

vineethk · 2024-11-26T15:38:15Z

third_party/move/move-compiler-v2/tests/lambda/storable/doable_func.move

+    }
+
+    public fun test_functions() {
+        // let sum = vector[];


stray comment?

vineethk · 2024-11-26T15:39:52Z

third_party/move/move-compiler-v2/src/env_pipeline/ast_simplifier.rs

@@ -978,7 +978,8 @@ impl<'env> ExpRewriterFunctions for SimplifierRewriter<'env> {
                    let ability_set = self
                        .env()
                        .type_abilities(&ty, self.func_env.get_type_parameters_ref());
-                    ability_set.has_ability(Ability::Drop)
+                    // Don't drop a function-valued expression so we don't lose errors.


Is there a test case corresponding to this?

vineethk · 2024-11-26T15:46:45Z

third_party/move/move-compiler-v2/src/env_pipeline/lambda_lifter.rs

@@ -14,14 +14,16 @@
 //!
 //! Lambda lifting rewrites lambda expressions into construction
 //! of *closures*. A closure refers to a function and contains a partial list
-//! of arguments for that function, essentially currying it. Example:
+//! of arguments for that function, essentially currying it.  We use the
+//! `EarlyBind` operation to construct a closure from a function and set of arguemnts,


Suggested change

//! `EarlyBind` operation to construct a closure from a function and set of arguemnts,

//! `EarlyBind` operation to construct a closure from a function and set of arguments,

vineethk · 2024-11-26T15:51:06Z

third_party/move/move-compiler-v2/src/env_pipeline/lambda_lifter.rs

+    // If final `args` match `lambda_params`, and all other args are simple, then returns
+    // the simple prefix of `args`.
+    fn get_args_if_simple<'b>(
+        lambda_params: &Vec<Parameter>,


Suggested change

lambda_params: &Vec<Parameter>,

lambda_params: &[Parameter],

vineethk · 2024-11-26T15:57:54Z

third_party/move/move-model/bytecode/ast-generator-tests/tests/testsuite.rs

@@ -96,7 +96,7 @@ fn generate_output(target: &FunctionTarget, test_output: &mut String) -> Option<
    };
    *test_output += &format!(
        "--- Raw Generated AST\n{}\n\n",
-        exp.display_for_fun(target.func_env.clone())
+        exp.display_for_fun(target.func_env)


Can do the same (removing .clone()) for two more instances below (assign-transformed and var-bound).

vineethk · 2024-11-26T21:03:34Z

third_party/move/move-compiler-v2/tests/more-v1/parser/spec_parsing_ok.exp

@@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ error: expression construct not supported in specifications
 69 │         ensures RET = {let y = x; y + 1};
   │                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

-error: cannot pass `|(num, num)|num` to a function which expects argument of type `|(num, num)|bool`
+error: cannot pass `|(num, num)|num with copy+drop+store` to a function which expects argument of type `|(num, num)|bool`


I wonder if we could remove abilities (with copy+drop+store) from the type error message if the error is not due to abilities mismatch.

This is harder than it looks, in general at least. This will require changing the type unification algorithm to build an explanation when a difference is found.

I filed #15414.

vineethk · 2024-11-26T21:06:43Z

third_party/move/move-compiler-v2/tests/more-v1/parser/invalid_call_lhs_value2.exp

-  │          Expected ';'
+  │         ^
+
+error: expected `|(integer, integer)|_` but found a value of type `integer`


the description of expected is likely not intuitive to the user: should it not be |integer, integer| instead of |(integer, integer)|_?

The function doesn't exist. We don't know the return type here, so it is written as _.

We can improve this, but it shouldn't be in this PR, as it will change all test outputs.

Filed #15415

vineethk · 2024-11-26T21:09:03Z

third_party/move/move-compiler-v2/src/env_pipeline/lambda_lifter.rs

-                        name.display(env.symbol_pool())
-                    ),
+                    // TODO(LAMBDA)
+                    "Currently, lambda expressions must explicitly declare `move` capture of free variables, except when appearing as an argument to an inline functioncall."


Suggested change

"Currently, lambda expressions must explicitly declare `move` capture of free variables, except when appearing as an argument to an inline functioncall."

"Currently, lambda expressions must explicitly declare `move` capture of free variables, except when appearing as an argument to an inline function call."

vineethk · 2024-11-26T21:23:05Z

third_party/move/move-compiler-v2/src/env_pipeline/lambda_lifter.rs

+    }
+
+    // Only allow simple expressions which cannot vary or abort
+    fn exp_is_simple(fn_exp: &Exp) -> bool {


nit: fn_exp -> exp?

We are using "simple" in two different contexts: arg being simple, and expression being simple. Can we use different terms here to avoid confusion?

vineethk · 2024-11-26T21:27:55Z

third_party/move/move-compiler-v2/src/env_pipeline/lambda_lifter.rs

+        None
+    }
+
+    // Only allow simple expressions which cannot vary or abort


What is an expression that can "vary"?

A function call. I also don't want things to be too expensive, in case pulling them out of the lambda changes semantics. I changed the comment to indicate that.

If we weren't in rust, then I might be worried about a value that has references taken, but reference semantics should take care of that:

brmataptos

i've just pushed a new commit a moment ago to this PR.

I think I've addressed all reported issues, but I see 3 outstanding issues, seen by looking at lambda/storable/*_ok.lambda..exp:

some confusion between supported/implemented which is fixed in a stacked PR
function values not allowed as field types (also for later PR)
function types not allowed as type arguments (also for later PR)

I originally thought I could allow function calls to intermingle with . and [...] as in Rust (see Rust expression precedence allowing registry.functions[i].f(x) where f is a field of function type, but the simple approach leads to this being interpreted as calling a method through receiver syntax.

Instead, I'm requiring that a function-value used as a function be in parentheses for MVP:

f(x)
(registry.functions[i].f)(x)
Rust does better, but perhaps this be useful enough for now.

So, PTAL. And review and "resolve" any comments you made which are ok.

third_party/move/move-binary-format/src/file_format.rs

third_party/move/move-compiler-v2/src/env_pipeline/function_checker.rs

brmataptos · 2024-11-26T00:41:49Z

third_party/move/move-compiler/src/parser/ast.rs

@@ -689,7 +717,7 @@ pub enum Exp_ {
    // { seq }
    Block(Sequence),
    // | x1 [: t1], ..., xn [: tn] | e
-    Lambda(TypedBindList, Box<Exp>),
+    Lambda(TypedBindList, Box<Exp>, LambdaCaptureKind, Vec<Ability>),


third_party/move/move-binary-format/src/file_format.rs

brmataptos · 2024-11-26T00:57:50Z

third_party/move/move-compiler/src/parser/syntax.rs

@@ -1901,9 +1902,35 @@ fn at_start_of_exp(context: &mut Context) -> bool {
    )
 }

+// Parse the rest of a lambda expression, after already processing any capture designator (move/copy).


brmataptos · 2024-11-26T01:33:10Z

third_party/move/move-model/src/ast.rs

-    Lambda(NodeId, Pattern, Exp),
+    Lambda(NodeId, Pattern, Exp, LambdaCaptureKind, AbilitySet),
+    /// Represents a reference to a Move Function as a function value.
+    MoveFunctionExp(NodeId, ModuleId, FunId),


Renamed as EarlyBind.

brmataptos · 2024-11-26T01:34:11Z

third_party/move/move-compiler/src/shared/ast_debug.rs

-///             fields,
-///         } = self;
-///         ...
+///     impl AstDebug for StructDefinition {


brmataptos · 2024-11-26T01:34:28Z

third_party/move/move-compiler/src/parser/syntax.rs

+            if !abilities.is_empty() {
+                let abilities_end = context.tokens.previous_end_loc();
+                let loc = make_loc(context.tokens.file_hash(), abilities_start, abilities_end);
+                require_move_2(context, loc, "Ability constraints on function types");


brmataptos · 2024-11-27T06:37:37Z

third_party/move/move-compiler/src/parser/syntax.rs

@@ -2209,6 +2250,10 @@ fn parse_dot_or_index_chain(context: &mut Context) -> Result<Exp, Box<Diagnostic
                consume_token(context.tokens, Tok::RBracket)?;
                exp
            },
+            Tok::LParen => {


Ok, renamed it to parse_dot_or_index_or_call_chain. Also fixed the bug in the syntax comment.

brmataptos · 2024-11-27T06:43:48Z

third_party/move/move-compiler/src/parser/syntax.rs

@@ -2209,6 +2250,10 @@ fn parse_dot_or_index_chain(context: &mut Context) -> Result<Exp, Box<Diagnostic
                consume_token(context.tokens, Tok::RBracket)?;
                exp
            },
+            Tok::LParen => {
+                let args = parse_call_args(context)?;
+                Exp_::ExpCall(Box::new(lhs), args)


Added some tests to registry_ok.move to illustrate.

These will not run due to reentrancy, but are ok for now.

…le of function type

…unnecessarily; avoid generating errors/warnings about default Loc

…ionExpr to Value::Function, got things mostly back in shape

…for abilities in lambda_lifter.rs

…_curry`

…constraints to avoid reducing set of function type abilities when unifying types

…to bind leading arguments

vineethk

There is still one parser fix I have requested (setting of span location for || when parsing lambdas), but approving assuming that is fixed.

…ser location on `||`

brmataptos mentioned this pull request Sep 28, 2024

[compiler-v2] add test cases for lambda #14791

Merged

22 tasks

brmataptos mentioned this pull request Sep 28, 2024

[move-compiler-v2] fix #14633: fix error messages for lambdas, identify change points for more complete lambda implementation #14742

Merged

22 tasks

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-extend_parser_for_lambda_types branch from 7f59256 to ae73f37 Compare September 30, 2024 17:09

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-add_parser_code_for_lambda_types branch from dbd482d to 270214e Compare September 30, 2024 17:09

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-extend_parser_for_lambda_types branch from ae73f37 to 243ea0f Compare September 30, 2024 18:43

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-add_parser_code_for_lambda_types branch from 270214e to afbad9b Compare September 30, 2024 18:44

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-extend_parser_for_lambda_types branch from 243ea0f to f3d30eb Compare October 3, 2024 01:42

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-add_parser_code_for_lambda_types branch from a40a3c9 to 71ef91f Compare October 3, 2024 01:43

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-extend_parser_for_lambda_types branch from f3d30eb to 0cc6890 Compare October 3, 2024 01:52

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-add_parser_code_for_lambda_types branch from 71ef91f to 3a1d362 Compare October 3, 2024 01:53

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-extend_parser_for_lambda_types branch from 0cc6890 to 1b54f30 Compare October 3, 2024 04:42

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-add_parser_code_for_lambda_types branch 2 times, most recently from c46a244 to b3c1106 Compare October 3, 2024 06:09

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-extend_parser_for_lambda_types branch from ad600f0 to 017f471 Compare October 3, 2024 17:01

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-add_parser_code_for_lambda_types branch from b3c1106 to a65ee0f Compare October 3, 2024 17:01

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-extend_parser_for_lambda_types branch from 017f471 to b7d429a Compare October 10, 2024 04:18

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-add_parser_code_for_lambda_types branch from a65ee0f to cbb77b0 Compare October 10, 2024 04:18

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-extend_parser_for_lambda_types branch from b7d429a to c99de22 Compare October 10, 2024 05:25

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-add_parser_code_for_lambda_types branch from cbb77b0 to b2185c2 Compare October 10, 2024 05:25

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-extend_parser_for_lambda_types branch from c99de22 to d3254ad Compare October 18, 2024 18:03

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-add_parser_code_for_lambda_types branch from b2185c2 to 3f98e56 Compare October 18, 2024 18:04

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-extend_parser_for_lambda_types branch from d3254ad to 7e21319 Compare October 18, 2024 18:08

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-add_parser_code_for_lambda_types branch from 3f98e56 to e24bf4e Compare October 18, 2024 18:08

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-extend_parser_for_lambda_types branch from 7e21319 to 7cfe2c4 Compare October 21, 2024 07:10

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-add_parser_code_for_lambda_types branch from e24bf4e to 2a740e8 Compare October 21, 2024 07:10

Base automatically changed from 09-27-extend_parser_for_lambda_types to main October 21, 2024 07:48

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-add_parser_code_for_lambda_types branch from 2a740e8 to dabc427 Compare October 26, 2024 00:05

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-add_parser_code_for_lambda_types branch from 4745b14 to 9b3a2af Compare November 22, 2024 01:38

brmataptos mentioned this pull request Nov 22, 2024

[move-compiler-v2] clean up a few remaining issues in lambda parser/front-end code #15365

Open

22 tasks

rahxephon89 reviewed Nov 23, 2024

View reviewed changes

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-add_parser_code_for_lambda_types branch from 9395a8f to cead217 Compare November 25, 2024 04:53

brmataptos mentioned this pull request Nov 25, 2024

Lambda support in VM: Wolfgang's PR plus some simplifications (removing mask, clarifying ops) #15387

Open

vineethk reviewed Nov 25, 2024

View reviewed changes

vineethk self-requested a review November 26, 2024 01:46

vineethk reviewed Nov 26, 2024

View reviewed changes

brmataptos commented Nov 27, 2024

View reviewed changes

brmataptos added 13 commits November 27, 2024 01:15

MVP lambda support in parser and expression builder

ea38cc7

fix issue with expected_type and curry construction with local variab…

90d3548

…le of function type

undo some debugging tweaks to type printing that increased diff size …

9ce0775

…unnecessarily; avoid generating errors/warnings about default Loc

run rust_lint.sh, move_pr -2 -i

2446233

inverted mask sense, changed Curry expr to Operation::Bind, MoveFunct…

2f59a4c

…ionExpr to Value::Function, got things mostly back in shape

fix a merge conflict that duplicated code, and check bound variables …

c6e83a5

…for abilities in lambda_lifter.rs

undo underscore support

3c67312

handle more function values in `LambdaLifter::try_to_reduce_lambda_to…

6dc7765

…_curry`

add AbilitySet::MAXIMAL_FUNCTIONS and use it in some function type …

5af3659

…constraints to avoid reducing set of function type abilities when unifying types

fix lint

ae478f0

rename Bind to EarlyBind and remove mask in favor of just being able …

108536c

…to bind leading arguments

address rest of comments on PR as of 11/26

982d07c

address a few remaining comments from Vineeth that I missed before

44baaf0

brmataptos force-pushed the 09-27-add_parser_code_for_lambda_types branch from cead217 to 44baaf0 Compare November 27, 2024 10:24

vineethk self-requested a review November 27, 2024 15:00

vineethk approved these changes Nov 27, 2024

View reviewed changes

brmataptos requested review from fEst1ck, rahxephon89 and wrwg November 27, 2024 17:48

brmataptos added 2 commits November 27, 2024 10:37

suppress drop ability in function types, since it's common; fix par…

be0e6e8

…ser location on `||`

fix move-model test output that slightly changes

bab1e7d

	//! `EarlyBind` operation to construct a closure from a function and set of arguemnts,
	//! `EarlyBind` operation to construct a closure from a function and set of arguments,

	"Currently, lambda expressions must explicitly declare `move` capture of free variables, except when appearing as an argument to an inline functioncall."
	"Currently, lambda expressions must explicitly declare `move` capture of free variables, except when appearing as an argument to an inline function call."

[move-compiler-v2] add parser code for lambda types #14792

Are you sure you want to change the base?

[move-compiler-v2] add parser code for lambda types #14792

Conversation

brmataptos commented Sep 28, 2024 • edited Loading

Description

Current Gaps

How Has This Been Tested?

Key Areas to Review

Type of Change

Which Components or Systems Does This Change Impact?

Checklist

trunk-io bot commented Sep 28, 2024 • edited Loading

brmataptos commented Sep 28, 2024 • edited Loading

codecov bot commented Sep 28, 2024 • edited Loading

Codecov Report

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

vineethk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

brmataptos left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

vineethk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

brmataptos commented Sep 28, 2024 •

edited

Loading

trunk-io bot commented Sep 28, 2024 •

edited

Loading

brmataptos commented Sep 28, 2024 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Sep 28, 2024 •

edited

Loading