* Formerly, we reported the same error message if we detected no default
clause or more than one. I made it so that we output a different error
message for each. This makes it more clear, and in the case of more than
one, the error source location points at the second default clause,
rather than at the switch statement.
* Add functions to ProgramBuilder to more easily define switch and case
statements.
* Fix broken tests as a result of this change.
Bug: tint:642
Change-Id: Iab4e610a563165862d9bc190772d32a4dd24ac45
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/45880
Kokoro: Kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Ben Clayton <bclayton@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Antonio Maiorano <amaiorano@google.com>
Call validation was already implemented in Resolver. This change
completes it by deleting the relevant code in Validator, and moving and
updating the builtins validation test to use the Resolver.
Also added the "v-0004" error code for when detecting recursion, as was
done for the similar error in the Validator.
Bug: tint:642
Bug: tint:487
Change-Id: If7973bfd2d19681a0cbf48c6d427e17a3b927cde
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/45463
Commit-Queue: Antonio Maiorano <amaiorano@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Ben Clayton <bclayton@google.com>
This was mostly already implemented in the Resolver, except for adding a
variable scope for blocks.
Moved tests and improved them to only add Source on the error node.
Bug: tint:642
Change-Id: I175dd22c873df5933133bc92276101aeab3021ed
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/45460
Commit-Queue: Antonio Maiorano <amaiorano@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Ben Clayton <bclayton@google.com>
* Fixed many tests that now failed validation. Most of the time,
functions declared that they returned a type, but with no return
statement.
* ProgramBuilder::WrapInFunction now returns the function is creates,
and std::moves its StatementList.
* ProgramBuilder: Added Return function to create ast::ReturnStatements
more easily.
Bug: tint:642
Change-Id: I3011314e66e264ebd7b89bf9271392391be6a0e5
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/45382
Reviewed-by: Antonio Maiorano <amaiorano@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Ben Clayton <bclayton@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Antonio Maiorano <amaiorano@google.com>
This performs very basic type verification for assignments and variable initializers.
Pulls part of the validation logic out of the Validator into the Resolver.
Involves fixing up a bunch of broken tests.
Bug: tint:642
Fixed: tint:631
Change-Id: Ifbdc139ff7eeab810856e0ba9e3c380c6555ec20
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/45281
Commit-Queue: Ben Clayton <bclayton@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Neto <dneto@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Antonio Maiorano <amaiorano@google.com>
Added enforcement for vector constructor type rules according to the
table in https://gpuweb.github.io/gpuweb/wgsl.html#type-constructor-expr.
This surfaced a number of existing tests that violated some of these
rules or had a type-declaration related bug, so this CL fixes those as
well (these tests either passed the incorrect number of arguments to a
vector constructor or relied on implicit conversions between numeric
types).
Fixed: tint:632
Fixed: tint:476
Change-Id: I8279be3eeae50b64db486ee7a91a43bd94fdff62
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/44480
Commit-Queue: Arman Uguray <armansito@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Ben Clayton <bclayton@google.com>
Let's keep these for the SPIR-V reader case. The way things currently work is actually nicer than attempting to generate size / align decorations in the SPIR-V reader.
Change-Id: I83087c153e3b3056e737dcfbfd73ae6a0986bd7c
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/44684
Commit-Queue: Ben Clayton <bclayton@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Neto <dneto@google.com>
Implements https://github.com/gpuweb/gpuweb/pull/1447
SPIR-V Reader is still TODO, but continues to function as the offset
decoration is still supported.
Bug: tint:626
Bug: tint:629
Change-Id: Id574eb3a5c6729559382812de37b23f0c68fd406
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/43640
Commit-Queue: Ben Clayton <bclayton@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: David Neto <dneto@google.com>
Remove the decoration groupings (Array, Function, Struct,
StructMember, Type, Variable), such that all *Decoration classes now
subclass ast::Decoration directly. This allows for decorations to be
used in multiple places; for example, builtin decorations are now
valid for both variables and struct members.
Checking that decoration lists only contain decorations that are valid
for the node that they are attached to is now done inside the
validator.
Change-Id: Ie8c0e53e5730a7dedea50a1dec8f26f9e7b00e8d
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/44320
Commit-Queue: James Price <jrprice@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Ben Clayton <bclayton@chromium.org>
The readers must not produce invalid ASTs.
If readers cannot produce a valid AST, then they should error instead.
If a reader does produce an invalid AST, this change catches this bad behavior early, significantly helping identify the root of the broken logic.
IsValid() made a bit more sense in the days where the AST was mutable, and was constructed by calling setters on the nodes to build up the tree.
In order to detect bad ASTs, IsValid() would have to perform an entire AST traversal and give a yes / no answer for the entire tree. Not only was this slow, an answer of 'no' didn't tell you *where* the AST was invalid, resulting in a lot of manual debugging.
Now that the AST is fully immutable, all child nodes need to be built before their parents. The AST node constructors now become a perfect place to perform pointer sanity checking.
The argument for attempting to catch and handle invalid ASTs is not a compelling one.
Invalid ASTs are invalid compiler behavior, not something that should ever happen with a correctly functioning compiler.
If this were to happen in production, the user would be utterly clueless to _why_ the program is invalid, or _how_ to fix it.
Attempting to handle invalid ASTs is just masking a much larger problem.
Let's just let the fuzzers do their job to catch any of these cases early.
Fixed: chromium:1185569
Change-Id: I6496426a3a9da9d42627d2c1ca23917bfd04cc5c
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/44048
Commit-Queue: Ben Clayton <bclayton@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: David Neto <dneto@google.com>
Try and make sense of the huge number of tests we have.
Rename tests so they have a consistent naming style.
Change-Id: I0c089d5945778a8718480a1a2f854435e7b0e79a
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/44162
Reviewed-by: Antonio Maiorano <amaiorano@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Antonio Maiorano <amaiorano@google.com>
