Incorrect result of out-of-bounds getindex on tuple of singletons #27910
Assignees
Labels
bug
Indicates an unexpected problem or unintended behavior
compiler:optimizer
Optimization passes (mostly in base/compiler/ssair/)
Comments
Keno
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 3, 2018
As part of the new optimizer work, I wrote a more accurate effect_free predicate (stmt_effect_free). However, the old optimizer's less accurate predicate stuck around and snuck into two places 1) The inliner 2) The optimize.jl code that computes proven_pure As a result, the compiler would eliminate certain statements, even if it could not prove that they were effect_free. Fix all that by getting rid of the old predicate and using the new one everywhere. Fixes #27910
JeffBezanson
added
compiler:optimizer
Keno
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 5, 2018
As part of the new optimizer work, I wrote a more accurate effect_free predicate (stmt_effect_free). However, the old optimizer's less accurate predicate stuck around and snuck into two places 1) The inliner 2) The optimize.jl code that computes proven_pure As a result, the compiler would eliminate certain statements, even if it could not prove that they were effect_free. Fix all that by getting rid of the old predicate and using the new one everywhere. Fixes #27910
Keno
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 6, 2018
As part of the new optimizer work, I wrote a more accurate effect_free predicate (stmt_effect_free). However, the old optimizer's less accurate predicate stuck around and snuck into two places 1) The inliner 2) The optimize.jl code that computes proven_pure As a result, the compiler would eliminate certain statements, even if it could not prove that they were effect_free. Fix all that by getting rid of the old predicate and using the new one everywhere. Fixes #27910
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
When evaluating
((),)[2], the expected result is the throw of aBoundsError.Instead, the result is simply
(). This behavior is incorrect.Discussion on discourse: https://discourse.julialang.org/t/inconsistent-bounds-checking-of-tuples/12102
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: