From: Andy Wingo <wingo@igalia.com>
To: "Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org>
Cc: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>, guix-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: better error messages through assertions
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 15:28:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bkxny3h8.fsf@igalia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87lewrwzll.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic Courtès"'s message of "Wed, 30 Mar 2022 11:37:10 +0200")
On Wed 30 Mar 2022 11:37, Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:
>> scheme@(guile-user)> (container-contents '())
>> ice-9/boot-9.scm:1685:16: In procedure raise-exception:
>> In procedure struct-vtable: Wrong type argument in position 1
> scheme@(guile-user)> ,use(srfi srfi-9)
> scheme@(guile-user)> (define-record-type <foo>
> (make-foo x)
> foo?
> (x foo-x))
> scheme@(guile-user)> ,optimize (foo-x '())
> $9 = (if (eq? (struct-vtable '()) <foo>)
> (struct-ref '() 0)
> (throw 'wrong-type-arg
> 'foo-x
> "Wrong type argument: ~S"
> (list '())
> (list '())))
>
> With Guile 3, it might be that adding an extra ‘struct?’ test would have
> little effect on performance; we’d need to check.
Would have no effect.
Incidentally, you might want to use ,optimize-cps;
scheme@(guile-user)> ,optimize (foo-x '())
$9 = (if (eq? (struct-vtable '()) <foo>)
(struct-ref '() 0)
(throw 'wrong-type-arg
'foo-x
"Wrong type argument: ~S"
(list '())
(list '())))
scheme@(guile-user)> ,optimize-cps (foo-x '())
L0: ; at <unknown>:15:14
v0 := self
L1(...)
L1:
receive()
v1 := const () ; arg at <unknown>:15:21
throw throw/value+data[#(wrong-type-arg "struct-vtable" "Wrong type argument in position 1 (expecting struct): ~S")](v1) ; at <unknown>:15:14
L1(...) means, pass all values to L1. In this case because there are
varargs on the stack from the procedure call. L1 parses them with the
receive(). Anyway, here we see that with respect to the immediate '(),
that all the tests folded. If we instead lift to a procedure:
scheme@(guile-user)> ,optimize-cps (lambda (x) (foo-x x))
L0: ; at <unknown>:16:14
v0 := self
L1(...)
L1:
receive()
v1 := current-module() ; module at <unknown>:16:14
cache-set![0](v1) ; at <unknown>:16:14
v2 := const-fun L7 ; _
return v2 ; at <unknown>:16:14
L7: ; at <unknown>:16:14
v3 := self
L8(...)
L8:
v4 := receive(x) ; x
heap-object?(v4) ? L10() : L38() ; at <unknown>:16:26
L10():
struct?(v4) ? L11() : L38() ; at <unknown>:16:26
L38():
throw throw/value+data[#(wrong-type-arg "struct-vtable" "Wrong type argument in position 1 (expecting struct): ~S")](v4) ; at <unknown>:16:26
L11():
v5 := scm-ref/tag[struct](v4) ; vtable at <unknown>:16:26
v6 := cache-ref[(0 . <foo>)]() ; cached at <unknown>:10:20
heap-object?(v6) ? L19() : L14() ; at <unknown>:10:20
L19():
L20(v6) ; at <unknown>:10:20
L14():
v7 := cache-ref[0]() ; mod at <unknown>:10:20
v8 := const <foo> ; name at <unknown>:10:20
v9 := lookup-bound(v7, v8) ; var at <unknown>:10:20
cache-set![(0 . <foo>)](v9) ; at <unknown>:10:20
L20(v9) ; at <unknown>:10:20
L20(v10): ; box
v11 := scm-ref/immediate[(box . 1)](v10) ; arg at <unknown>:10:20
eq?(v5, v11) ? L22() : L37() ; at <unknown>:16:26
L37():
throw throw/value+data[#(wrong-type-arg foo-x "Wrong type argument: ~S")](v4) ; at <unknown>:16:26
L22():
v12 := word-ref/immediate[(struct . 6)](v5) ; rfields at <unknown>:16:26
v13 := v12 ; nfields at <unknown>:16:26
imm-u64-<[0](v13) ? L25() : L35() ; at <unknown>:16:26
L35():
v21 := const 0 ; _ at <unknown>:16:26
throw throw/value+data[#(out-of-range "struct-ref/immediate" "Argument 2 out of range: ~S")](v21) ; at <unknown>:16:26
L25():
v14 := pointer-ref/immediate[(struct . 7)](v5) ; ptr at <unknown>:16:26
v15 := load-u64[0]() ; word at <unknown>:16:26
v16 := u32-ref[bitmask](v5, v14, v15) ; bits at <unknown>:16:26
v17 := load-u64[1]() ; mask at <unknown>:16:26
v18 := ulogand(v17, v16) ; res at <unknown>:16:26
u64-imm-=[0](v18) ? L31() : L33() ; at <unknown>:16:26
L33():
v20 := const 0 ; _ at <unknown>:16:26
throw throw/value+data[#(wrong-type-arg "struct-ref/immediate" "Wrong type argument in position 2 (expecting boxed field): ~S")](v20) ; at <unknown>:16:26
L31():
v19 := scm-ref/immediate[(struct . 1)](v4) ; val at <unknown>:16:26
return v19 ; at <unknown>:16:26
Here we see the first procedure which is the thunk that wraps the
expression. Then in the beginning of the procedure at L7 you can see
there is a check for struct?, which has to be dominated by a true
heap-object? check. Duplicate checks are elided. So if SRFI-9 added a
`struct?` check it wouldn't be more code; rather it would be less,
actually, because instead of branching to L38, you'd branch to L37.
Too bad about all that other crap about checking whether the index is in
range and the field is boxed or not, though :-/ Probably there is a
better design...
Andy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-30 13:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-14 22:32 better error messages through assertions Ricardo Wurmus
2022-02-15 8:48 ` Maxime Devos
2022-02-15 21:45 ` Philip McGrath
2022-02-15 22:15 ` Ricardo Wurmus
2022-02-28 12:59 ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-02-28 16:18 ` Philip McGrath
2022-03-07 10:13 ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-03-28 20:25 ` Philip McGrath
2022-03-30 9:37 ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-03-30 13:28 ` Andy Wingo [this message]
2022-04-01 8:47 ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-04-01 19:28 ` Philip McGrath
2022-04-05 12:04 ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-04-01 19:47 ` Philip McGrath
2022-02-22 4:31 ` Arun Isaac
2022-02-25 18:55 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2022-02-26 13:33 ` Ricardo Wurmus
2022-02-26 13:51 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2022-02-28 13:02 ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-02-28 16:00 ` Maxim Cournoyer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87bkxny3h8.fsf@igalia.com \
--to=wingo@igalia.com \
--cc=guix-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=ludo@gnu.org \
--cc=rekado@elephly.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.