Add a FacetValue instruction
#4545
Conversation
| // CHECK:STDOUT: } | ||
| // CHECK:STDOUT: | ||
| // CHECK:STDOUT: specific @F.1(i32) {} | ||
| // CHECK:STDOUT: specific @F.1(@impl.%.loc17) {} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hm, I think this should be referring to the constant value of the FacetValue instruction, not to the instruction itself, or we won't properly deduplicate specifics for the same type.
Probably just need a constant_values().Get call when we create the FacetValue -- or you can pass the FacetValue directly to TryEvalInst to get a ConstantId without creating an extra instruction.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The code is expecting an InstId, not a ConstantId -- is the idea that I will get the InstId for the constant? TryEvalInst also takes an InstId argument, should I pass in invalid or something?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I updated the PR with the TryEvalInst approach with an invalid InstId. It does reduce the constant indices back, as well as changing the arguments to these specifics.
toolchain/sem_ir/stringify_type.cpp
Outdated
| push_inst_id(inst.type_inst_id); | ||
| push_string(" as "); | ||
| push_inst_id(sem_ir.types().GetInstId(inst.type_id)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should this be:
| push_inst_id(inst.type_inst_id); | |
| push_string(" as "); | |
| push_inst_id(sem_ir.types().GetInstId(inst.type_id)); | |
| push_inst_id(sem_ir.types().GetInstId(inst.type_id)); | |
| push_string(" as "); | |
| push_inst_id(inst.type_inst_id); |
... because we process the pushed parts in reverse order?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I applied this change, but it seems this isn't covered by any of our tests. When would this type be stringified?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added the test you suggested, which seemed to have worked! 1371f33
Co-authored-by: Richard Smith <[email protected]>
|
Should I be concerned about the number of unused constants being generated? The most recent change seems to have increased how much this is happening: d605bf2 |
Co-authored-by: Richard Smith <[email protected]>
The new `FacetValue` instruction represents `C as I` for some type `C` and facet type `I`. It is named `FacetValue` instead of just `Facet` to parallel the `FacetType` instruction. This PR uses this instruction represent the facet value `Self` in an `impl` declaration. This instruction will be used in the future to also support things like: * `C as I` where `C` is a class; and * forming a specific for a generic with a `T:! I` parameter where `T` is being given a concrete value. (Here `I` is an interface or other non-`type` facet type.) Also do some renaming and add some comments to make things a bit more clear. * `FacetTypeAccess` -> `FacetAccessType` to clarify this is not access of a facet type, but access of the type of a facet * `.facet_id` -> `.facet_value_inst_id` to parallel the `FacetValue` instruction `FacetAccessWitness` will be in a future PR. --------- Co-authored-by: Josh L <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Richard Smith <[email protected]>
The new
FacetValueinstruction representsC as Ifor some typeCand facet typeI. It is namedFacetValueinstead of justFacetto parallel theFacetTypeinstruction.This PR uses this instruction represent the facet value
Selfin animpldeclaration. This instruction will be used in the future to also support things like:C as IwhereCis a class; andT:! Iparameter whereTis being given a concrete value.(Here
Iis an interface or other non-typefacet type.)Also do some renaming and add some comments to make things a bit more clear.
FacetTypeAccess->FacetAccessTypeto clarify this is not access of a facet type, but access of the type of a facet.facet_id->.facet_value_inst_idto parallel theFacetValueinstructionFacetAccessWitnesswill be in a future PR.