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>
All includes from .cc to .h are preserved, even when transitively included.
It's clear that there are far too many includes in header files, and we should be more aggressive with forward declarations. tint:532 will continue to track this work.
There are, however, plenty of includes that have accumulated over time which are no longer required directly or transitively, so this change starts with a clean slate of *required* includes.
Bug: tint:532
Change-Id: Ie1718dad565f8309fa180ef91bcf3920e76dba18
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/44042
Commit-Queue: Ben Clayton <bclayton@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Antonio Maiorano <amaiorano@google.com>
Semantic info is no longer part of the ast, so it is now odd to mention semantic info on a clone method for the AST.
Improve the documentation around cloning on the Program methods and the CloneContext.
Change-Id: Ib1cf255acfd994521aaa5add2789e5117db6b072
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/41548
Commit-Queue: Ben Clayton <bclayton@google.com>
Reviewed-by: dan sinclair <dsinclair@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: David Neto <dneto@google.com>
Will hold the mutable fields that currently reside in the otherwise immutable-AST.
Change the AST string methods to accept a `const semantic::Info&`. This is required as some nodes include type-resolved information in their output strings.
Bug: tint:390
Change-Id: Iba494a9c5645ce2096da0a8cfe63a4309a9d9c3c
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/39003
Commit-Queue: Ben Clayton <bclayton@google.com>
Reviewed-by: dan sinclair <dsinclair@chromium.org>
Annotate those that are set by the TypeDeterminer as "Semantic Info"
Bug: tint:396
Bug: tint:390
Change-Id: I0705c64e8e23d97a6430230728f82e64dd92efb7
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/35165
Auto-Submit: Ben Clayton <bclayton@google.com>
Commit-Queue: dan sinclair <dsinclair@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: dan sinclair <dsinclair@chromium.org>
Hopefully the trybot issue is now resolved.
This reverts commit 5792783e72,
unreverting commit 4d28b27935.
Change-Id: I2855bf17c5025a3d349e7fce16fdca342517aad3
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/34564
Reviewed-by: dan sinclair <dsinclair@chromium.org>
Commit-Queue: dan sinclair <dsinclair@chromium.org>
This reverts commit 4d28b27935.
Reason for revert: Seeing weird build breakage ...
Original change's description:
> [ast] Remove unused constructors and setters.
>
> This CL removes unused default constructors and various set methods
> from the AST classes where they are not longer required.
>
> Change-Id: Ic437911c62d8c9e4354a1fa6bdc8483ce7511daf
> Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/34641
> Auto-Submit: dan sinclair <dsinclair@chromium.org>
> Reviewed-by: Ben Clayton <bclayton@google.com>
> Commit-Queue: dan sinclair <dsinclair@chromium.org>
TBR=dsinclair@chromium.org,bclayton@google.com
Change-Id: I9d5bf6fd6d47131650c964cad4e17a1cbe86b040
No-Presubmit: true
No-Tree-Checks: true
No-Try: true
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/34682
Reviewed-by: dan sinclair <dsinclair@chromium.org>
Commit-Queue: dan sinclair <dsinclair@chromium.org>
This CL removes unused default constructors and various set methods
from the AST classes where they are not longer required.
Change-Id: Ic437911c62d8c9e4354a1fa6bdc8483ce7511daf
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/34641
Auto-Submit: dan sinclair <dsinclair@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Ben Clayton <bclayton@google.com>
Commit-Queue: dan sinclair <dsinclair@chromium.org>
Deep-clones all `Node`s and `Type`s into a new module.
Instead of writing a million standalone tests that'll only ever test the
existing fields of each type, I've opted to write the tests using
wgsl<->ast<->wgsl conversion. This means the tests require the enabling
of TINT_BUILD_WGSL_READER and TINT_BUILD_WGSL_WRITER, but I believe this
is much easier to maintain.
I'm aware there are probably gaps in the tests, and that even full
coverage is likely to rapidly rot, so I've also added
fuzzers/tint_ast_clone_fuzzer.cc - a fuzzer based test that ensures that
all AST modules can be cloned with identical reproduction.
I've run this across 100 cores of a 3990x for 4 hours, fixing the
single issue it detected.
Note: Expressions do not currently clone their `TypeManager` determined
types. This is for two reasons:
(a) This initial CL is mahoosive enough.
(b) I'm uncertain whether we actually want to clone this info, or to
re-run the `TypeDeterminer` after each AST transform. Maybe it should
be optional. Time will tell.
Fixed: tint:307
Change-Id: Id90fab06aaa740c805d12b66f3f11d1f452c6805
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/33300
Commit-Queue: Ben Clayton <bclayton@google.com>
Reviewed-by: dan sinclair <dsinclair@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: David Neto <dneto@google.com>
The hand-rolled `AsBlah()`, `IsBlah()` methods will be migrated in future changes.
Change-Id: I078c100b561b50018771cc38c1cac4379c393424
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/34301
Reviewed-by: dan sinclair <dsinclair@chromium.org>
This is a minimal effort to fix up the code. There's substantial code
cleanup which can now be done, which is done in the next change.
Bug: tint:322
Change-Id: Iafcf5e814837d9534889e8c21333de4931a19cfa
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/32864
Commit-Queue: dan sinclair <dsinclair@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: dan sinclair <dsinclair@chromium.org>
This CL adds a buffer array accessor clamping transform to
the available transforms in Tint.
Bug: tint:101
Change-Id: If9d5b0fb2c3adba723ce2185870b0e10981103a6
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/28980
Commit-Queue: Ryan Harrison <rharrison@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Ryan Harrison <rharrison@chromium.org>
Lots of little style nits needed to be fixed for this work.
BUG=tint:44
Change-Id: Ibb45d9e3f6795ee0c09f5eca994bb28e20979d97
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/19221
Reviewed-by: dan sinclair <dsinclair@google.com>
This Cl updates the names of the initializer expressions to be clearer.
* InitializerExpression -> ConstructorExpression
* ConstInitializerExpression -> ScalarConstructorExpression
* TypeInitializerExpression -> TypeConstructorExpression
Bug: tint:26
Change-Id: Ib046497f589cc65d1d64bc172015588348feeffe
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/18340
Reviewed-by: David Neto <dneto@google.com>
This CL adds unit tests for the array accessor expression class.
Change-Id: I97a7b366a2303b071040164cbcda404fe0592d90
Reviewed-on: https://dawn-review.googlesource.com/c/tint/+/16281
Reviewed-by: David Neto <dneto@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Dan Sinclair <dsinclair@google.com>
Ben Clayton
dan sinclair
Ryan Harrison
Dan Sinclair