Print renders incorrect values when passing multiple structs #4073
Labels
bug
Something isn't working
Comments
github-merge-queue bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 18, 2024
# Description ## Problem\* As part of our debugger implementation (see #3015) we need to extend the supported types that can be printed. We are using `noirc_printable_type` to keep values of variables at runtime for debug inspection. Also resolves #4073 ## Summary\* This PR adds support for converting these new types: - Tuples - Slices: lift the restriction to print them and handle arrays with dynamic size (flagging them with a `None` length in the type) - Functions: printed as an opaque `<<function>>` tag for now - Mutable references: printed as an opaque `<<mutable ref>>` tag for now - Unit: this is actually required to fully support function type conversion, for non-closured function references (ie. the environment is `()` in that case) The PR also fixes a preexisting bug when printing multiple values using formatted strings with the first ones being structs. Since structs are expanded into tuples which take up more than one field, the printing code would fail to skip over all the fields of the struct. ## Additional Context I've been using [this program](https://gist.github.com/ggiraldez/e3709def6c26e7585d12002fc8a0a216) to test this functionality. If it makes sense, I can add it as an integration test to `test_programs/execution_success`. The program produces this output: ``` (0x01, 0x02, 0x03) 0xbbbb # a = (0x01, 0x02, 0x03) # 0xeeee (0x01, 0x02, 0x03) == (0x01, 0x02, 0x03) ((0x01, 0x02, 0x03), 0x04, 0x05, 0x06) 0xbbbb # b = ((0x01, 0x02, 0x03), 0x04, 0x05, 0x06) # 0xeeee ((0x01, 0x02, 0x03), 0x04, 0x05, 0x06) == ((0x01, 0x02, 0x03), 0x04, 0x05, 0x06) <<mutable ref>> 0xbbbb # c = <<mutable ref>> # 0xeeee <<function>> 0xbbbb # d = <<function>> # 0xeeee <<function>> 0xbbbb # f = <<function>> # 0xeeee [0x01, 0x02, 0x03] 0xbbbb # g = [0x01, 0x02, 0x03] # 0xeeee [0x01, 0x02, 0x03] == [0x01, 0x02, 0x03] Foo { x: 555, y: 666 } == Foo { x: 555, y: 666 } Vec { slice: [0x01, 0x02] } 0xbbbb # h = Vec { slice: [0x01, 0x02] } # 0xeeee [0x01, 0x02] 0xbbbb # j = [0x01, 0x02] # 0xeeee [0x01, 0x02] == [0x01, 0x02] [printable_types] Circuit witness successfully solved ``` ## Documentation\* Check one: - [X] No documentation needed. - [ ] Documentation included in this PR. - [ ] **[Exceptional Case]** Documentation to be submitted in a separate PR. # PR Checklist\* - [X] I have tested the changes locally. - [X] I have formatted the changes with [Prettier](https://prettier.io/) and/or `cargo fmt` on default settings. --------- Co-authored-by: synthia <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Aim
Given the following program:
Expected Behavior
Should print
Bug
But instead prints
To Reproduce
Run the program.
Installation Method
None
Nargo Version
No response
Additional Context
This happens because the code to extract the values to print using a formatted string fail to take into account that the structs are expanded into a tuple occupying multiple fields. When decoding the second value, the first value retrieved corresponds to the overall second value, which in the example given is the second field of the first value struct.
Would you like to submit a PR for this Issue?
No
Support Needs
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: