Add finishing touches to code for part 6 of compiler series

This commit is contained in:
Danila Fedorin 2019-10-10 13:14:00 -07:00
parent 18e3f2af55
commit 21f90d85c5
6 changed files with 98 additions and 8 deletions

View File

@ -176,7 +176,7 @@ void ast_case::resolve(const type_mgr& mgr) const {
}
void ast_case::compile(const env_ptr& env, std::vector<instruction_ptr>& into) const {
type_data* type = dynamic_cast<type_data*>(node_type.get());
type_data* type = dynamic_cast<type_data*>(of->node_type.get());
of->compile(env, into);
into.push_back(instruction_ptr(new instruction_eval()));
@ -201,9 +201,15 @@ void ast_case::compile(const env_ptr& env, std::vector<instruction_ptr>& into) c
}
jump_instruction->branches.push_back(std::move(branch_instructions));
} else if((cpat = dynamic_cast<pattern_constr*>(branch->pat.get()))) {
env_ptr new_env = env;
for(auto it = cpat->params.rbegin(); it != cpat->params.rend(); it++) {
new_env = env_ptr(new env_var(*it, new_env));
}
branch_instructions.push_back(instruction_ptr(new instruction_split()));
branch->expr->compile(env_ptr(new env_offset(cpat->params.size(), env)),
branch_instructions);
branch->expr->compile(new_env, branch_instructions);
branch_instructions.push_back(instruction_ptr(new instruction_slide(
cpat->params.size())));
int new_tag = type->constructors[cpat->constr].tag;
if(jump_instruction->tag_mappings.find(new_tag) !=

View File

@ -59,6 +59,7 @@ struct definition {
virtual void typecheck_first(type_mgr& mgr, type_env& env) = 0;
virtual void typecheck_second(type_mgr& mgr, const type_env& env) const = 0;
virtual void resolve(const type_mgr& mgr) = 0;
virtual void compile() = 0;
};
using definition_ptr = std::unique_ptr<definition>;
@ -168,6 +169,8 @@ struct definition_defn : public definition {
type_ptr return_type;
std::vector<type_ptr> param_types;
std::vector<instruction_ptr> instructions;
definition_defn(std::string n, std::vector<std::string> p, ast_ptr b)
: name(std::move(n)), params(std::move(p)), body(std::move(b)) {
@ -176,6 +179,7 @@ struct definition_defn : public definition {
void typecheck_first(type_mgr& mgr, type_env& env);
void typecheck_second(type_mgr& mgr, const type_env& env) const;
void resolve(const type_mgr& mgr);
void compile();
};
struct definition_data : public definition {
@ -188,4 +192,5 @@ struct definition_data : public definition {
void typecheck_first(type_mgr& mgr, type_env& env);
void typecheck_second(type_mgr& mgr, const type_env& env) const;
void resolve(const type_mgr& mgr);
void compile();
};

View File

@ -41,6 +41,15 @@ void definition_defn::resolve(const type_mgr& mgr) {
}
}
void definition_defn::compile() {
env_ptr new_env = env_ptr(new env_offset(0, nullptr));
for(auto it = params.rbegin(); it != params.rend(); it++) {
new_env = env_ptr(new env_var(*it, new_env));
}
body->compile(new_env, instructions);
instructions.push_back(instruction_ptr(new instruction_update(params.size())));
}
void definition_data::typecheck_first(type_mgr& mgr, type_env& env) {
type_data* this_type = new type_data(name);
type_ptr return_type = type_ptr(this_type);
@ -67,3 +76,6 @@ void definition_data::resolve(const type_mgr& mgr) {
// Nothing
}
void definition_data::compile() {
}

View File

@ -21,12 +21,12 @@ void instruction_push::print(int indent, std::ostream& to) const {
void instruction_mkapp::print(int indent, std::ostream& to) const {
print_indent(indent, to);
to << "Push()" << std::endl;
to << "MkApp()" << std::endl;
}
void instruction_update::print(int indent, std::ostream& to) const {
print_indent(indent, to);
to << "Offset(" << offset << ")" << std::endl;
to << "Update(" << offset << ")" << std::endl;
}
void instruction_pack::print(int indent, std::ostream& to) const {
@ -48,6 +48,8 @@ void instruction_jump::print(int indent, std::ostream& to) const {
}
to << std::endl;
}
print_indent(indent, to);
to << ")" << std::endl;
}
void instruction_slide::print(int indent, std::ostream& to) const {

View File

@ -42,6 +42,19 @@ void typecheck_program(
}
}
void compile_program(const std::vector<definition_ptr>& prog) {
for(auto& def : prog) {
def->compile();
definition_defn* defn = dynamic_cast<definition_defn*>(def.get());
if(!defn) continue;
for(auto& instruction : defn->instructions) {
instruction->print(0, std::cout);
}
std::cout << std::endl;
}
}
int main() {
yy::parser parser;
type_mgr mgr;
@ -60,6 +73,7 @@ int main() {
}
try {
typecheck_program(program, mgr, env);
compile_program(program);
} catch(unification_error& err) {
std::cout << "failed to unify types: " << std::endl;
std::cout << " (1) \033[34m";

View File

@ -168,6 +168,10 @@ first define C++ structs for the instructions of the G-machine:
{{< codeblock "C++" "compiler/06/instruction.hpp" >}}
I omit the implementation of the various (trivial) `print` methods in this post;
as always, you can look at the full project source code, which is
freely available for each post in the series.
We can now envision a method on the `ast` struct that takes an environment
(just like our compilation scheme takes the environment \\(\\rho\\\)),
and compiles the `ast`. Rather than returning a vector
@ -282,7 +286,7 @@ struct, called `type_data`:
When we create types from `definition_data`, we tag the corresponding constructors:
{{< codelines "C++" "compiler/06/definition.cpp" 35 51 >}}
{{< codelines "C++" "compiler/06/definition.cpp" 53 69 >}}
Ah, but adding constructor info to the type doesn't solve the problem.
Once we performed type checking, we don't keep
@ -339,7 +343,7 @@ of a node. Here's a sample implementation from `ast_binop`:
And here's the implementation of `definition::resolve` on `definition_defn`:
{{< codelines "C++" "compiler/06/definition.cpp" 31 33 >}}
{{< codelines "C++" "compiler/06/definition.cpp" 32 42 >}}
Finally, we call `resolve` at the end `typecheck_program` in `main.cpp`:
@ -348,7 +352,7 @@ Finally, we call `resolve` at the end `typecheck_program` in `main.cpp`:
At last, we're ready to implement the code for compiling `ast_case`.
Here it is, in all its glory:
{{< codelines "C++" "compiler/06/ast.cpp" 178 224 >}}
{{< codelines "C++" "compiler/06/ast.cpp" 178 230 >}}
There's a lot to unpack here. First of all, just like we said in the compilation
scheme, we want to build and evaluate the expression that's being analyzed.
@ -399,4 +403,51 @@ After we're done with all the branches, we also check for non-exhaustive pattern
since otherwise we could run into runtime errors. With this, the case expression,
and the last of the AST nodes, can be compiled.
We also add a `compile` method to definitions, since they contain
our AST nodes. The method is empty for `defn_data`, and
looks as follows for `definition_defn`:
{{< codelines "C++" "compiler/06/definition.cpp" 44 51 >}}
Finally, we make a function in our `main.cpp` file to compile
all the definitions:
{{< codelines "C++" "compiler/06/main.cpp" 45 56 >}}
In this method, we also include some extra
output to help us see the result of our compilation. Since
at the moment, only the `definition_defn` program has to
be compiled, we try cast all definitions to it, and if
we succeed, we print them out.
Let's try it all out! For the below sample program:
{{< rawblock "compiler/06/examples/works1.txt" >}}
Our compiler produces the following new output:
```
PushInt(6)
PushInt(320)
PushGlobal(plus)
MkApp()
MkApp()
Push(1)
Push(1)
PushGlobal(+)
MkApp()
MkApp()
```
The first sequence of instructions is clearly `main`. It creates
an application of `plus` to `320`, and then applies that to
`6`, which results in `plus 320 6`, which is correct. The
second sequence of instruction pushes the parameter that
sits on offset 1 from the top of the stack (`y`). It then
pushes a parameter from the same offset again, but this time,
since `y` was previously pushed on the stack, `x` is now
in that position, so `x` is pushed onto the stack.
Finally, `+` is pushed, and the application
`(+) x y` is created, which is equivalent to `x+y`.
{{< todo >}}Backport bugfix in case's typecheck{{< /todo >}}