This bug drove me nuts for several hours until I figured out what was
going on.
The assignment sub-tree is being generated, then lost. It works for
simple assignments because a = b = c -> (= a (= b c)), but for complex
assignments (those that require move or memset), a = b = c -> (b = c) (a
= c) but nothing points to (b = c). The cause is using binary
expressions to store assignments.
It proved to be too fragile in its current implementation. It broke
pointers to incomplete structs and switch enum checking, and getting it
to work for other things was overly invasive. I still want the encoding,
but need to come up with something more robust.a
It turns out the enumerator type and enum type wind up with different
instances of the same type (due to the way type chaining works). This
results in infinite recursion in assign_expr and check_types_compatible.
Not sure just what version of automake broke things, but I do remember
having a bad time getting the dependencies to work in the first place.
At least now they should be more reliable (until automake changes
things).
After messing with SIMD stuff for a little, I think I now understand why
the industry went with xyzw instead of the mathematical wxyz. Anyway, this
will make for less pain in the future (assuming I got everything).
If the kahan triangle area method breaks, I did something wrong with qfcc's
handling of parentheses (ie, floating point math is not truly associative).
This is a nice feature found in fteqcc (also a bit of a challenge from
Spike). Getting bison to accept the new expression required rewriting the
state expression grammar, so this is mostly for the state expression. A
test to ensure the state expression doesn't break is included.
It seems dag_set_live_vars still served a purpose after all, but I don't
feel like bringing it as I'd rather implement its param handing in
dagnode_set_edges. I've now got a test case for it, though the test
currently causes the VM to segfault (even with pr_boundscheck 2!).
If the final block ends in a conditional statement, appending return to the
block will hide the conditional statement from the flow analyzer. This may
cause the conditional statement's destination node be become unreachable
according to the analyzer and thus eliminated. The label for the branch
then loses its target sblock and thus the code generator will produce a
zero-distance jump resulting in an infinite loop.
Thus, if the final block ends in a conditional statement (or, for
completeness, a call statement), append a new empty block before adding the
return statement.
It turns out they're not getting allocated properly (they're put in the
function's locals defspace rather than near data), but fixing it proved a
little more problematic than expected, so the test is marked as XFAIL for
now to remind me to fix it.
