I think the current build_element_chain implementation does a reasonable
job, but I'm in the process of getting designated initializers working,
thus it will become important to ensure uninitialized members get
initialized.
I never liked the various hacks I had come up with for representing
resource handles in Ruamoko. Structs with an int were awkward to test,
pointers and ints could be modified, etc etc. The new @handle keyword (@
used to keep handle free for use) works just like struct, union and
enum in syntax, but creates an opaque type suitable for a 32-bit handle.
The backing type is a function so v6 progs can use it without (all the
necessary opcodes exist) and no modifications were needed for
type-checking in binary expressions, but only assignment and comparisons
are supported, and (of course) nil. Tested using cbuf_t and QFile: seems
to work as desired.
I had considered 64-bit handles, but really, if more than 4G resource
objects are needed, I'm not sure QF can handle the game. However, that
limit is per resource manager, not total.
This takes advantage of the ud-chains to follow the trail of pointer
assignments looking for an address. This gets array element assignments
surviving across blocks when the array itself is passed to a function.
It doesn't help when the address of the element is taken though. I think
that's a dags problem and probably needs du-chains. Also, the ud-chain
creation should probably be done in two passes so the newly found
information can be recorded.
Def and kill are still handled in flow_analyze_statement, but this makes
call meta data more consistent between v6 and ruamoko progs, allowing
the statement use chain to be used for call argument analysis. It even
found a bug in the extraction of param counts from the call instruction.
I had missed the flowvar clearing for auxiliary use/def/kill operands.
It's possible it wasn't necessary at the time since the operands were
added just for dealloc checking, but there's every reason it could
become necessary.
The first use will be pointer analysis for function arguments where the
argument points to an array to mark the array as live, but I'm sure
there'll be plenty of other uses.
A partial write to a def should not define the whole def, thus
def_visit_all's overlap parameter now has a flag that prevents a visit
to the main def when accessing the def from an alias def. This prevents
a lot of spurious kills and defines in flow analysis.
The array access code was loading the vector, modifying the element,
then forgetting to write the modified vector back to whence it came.
However, that would be rather sub-optimal, so now when the vector is
accessed by a pointer, the array code switches to field access to get at
the vector element thus avoiding the need to copy the whole vector.
Needed for proper analysis (ud-chains etc). Of course, it was then
necessary to remove the parameter defs from the uninitialized defs.
Also, plug a couple of memory leaks (forgot to free some temporary
sets).
That is, `array + offset`. This actually works around the bug
highlighted by arraylife.r (because the array is explicitly used), but
is not a proper solution, so that test still fails of course. However,
with this, it's no longer necessary to use `&array[index]` instead of
`array + index`.
I could never remember what any of the numbers meant. While define is
still a little fuzzy (they're (pseudo)statement numbers), at least now
I'll always know that the numbers are the define set. Also, having the
flow address of the variable helps with understanding the reaching defs
output.
It seems that the optimizer keeps array assignments live when passing
the array as a pointer, but not when passing the address of an element.
Found when testing the following code:
BasisBlade *pga_blades[16] = {
blades[1], blades[2], blades[3], blades[4],
blades[7], blades[6], blades[5], blades[0],
blades[8], blades[9], blades[10], blades[15],
blades[14], blades[13], blades[12], blades[11],
};
BasisGroup *pga_groups[4] = {
[BasisGroup new:4 basis:&pga_blades[ 0]],
[BasisGroup new:4 basis:&pga_blades[ 4]],
[BasisGroup new:4 basis:&pga_blades[ 8]],
[BasisGroup new:4 basis:&pga_blades[12]],
};
Only the first element of pga_blades is being assigned in the optimized
code, but everything is correct when not optimizing.
I had messed up the handling of declarators for combinations of pointer,
function, and array: the pointer would get lost (and presumably arrays
of functions etc). I think I had gotten confused and thought things were
a tree rather than a simple list, but Holub set me straight once again
(I've never regretted getting that book). Once I understood that, it was
just a matter of finding all the places that needed to be fixed. Nicely,
most of the duplicated code has been refactored and should be easier to
debug in the future.
It turns out I broke the type system when it comes to pointers to
functions and arrays. This test checks basic function and array pointers
and passes with qfcc from before the type system rework.
The type system rewrite had lost some of the checks for function fields.
This puts the actual code in the one place and covers parameters as well
as globals.
Internally, * is not really a valid operator for vectors since it can
have many meanings. This didn't cause trouble until trying to build
everything in game-source (since there's still a lot of legacy code in
there).
The precedence check changes done in
63795e790b seem to have been incorrect
(game-source/ctf produced many false positives), so putting that check
against '=' back into the code seems like a good idea (no more false
positives). That sounds a bit cargo-cult, but I'm really not sure what I
was thinking when I did the changes (probably just tired).
This applies only to the top-level scope of the function. I'm not sure
if it's right for traditional quakec code, but that can be adjusted
easily enough.
The symtab code itself cares only about global/not global for the size
of the hash table, but other code can use the symtab type for various
checks (eg, parameter shadowing).
Along with QuakeC's, of course. This fixes type typeredef2 test (a lot
of work for one little syntax error). Unfortunately, it came at the cost
of requiring `>>` in front of state expressions on C-style functions
(QuakeC-style functions are unaffected). Also, there are now two
shift/reduce conflicts with structs and unions (but these same conflicts
are in gcc 3.4).
This has highlighted the need for having the equivalent of the
expression tree for the declaration system as there are now several
hacks to deal with the separation of types and declarators. But that's a
job for another week.
The grammar constructs for declarations come from gcc 3.4's parser (I
think it's the last version of gcc that used bison. Also, 3.4 is still
GPL 2, so no chance of an issue there).
This simplifies type type_specifier rule significantly as now TYPE_SPEC
(was TYPE) includes all types and their basic modifiers (long, short,
signed, unsigned). This should allow me to make the type system closer
to gcc's (as of 3.4 as that seems to be the last version that used a
bison parser) and thus fix typeredef2.
typeredef1 parses properly but fails due to it erroneously complaining
that foo is redeclared as a different kind of object (it's the same
kind).
typeredef2 is the real problem in that it's a syntax error when it
should not be. This has proven to be a show-stopper for development on
my laptop as it has very recent vulkan headers which have such a
duplicate typedef.
Once a unicode char (ie, > 127) was used, any ascii chars would get the
tail of the last unicode char resulting in broken utf-8 streams. The
resulting null glyph boxes were not very appealing.
Because of the way the plane normal is used (front/on/back checks, and
midpoint calculation), other than possible precision, there is no need
to normalize the normal. Removing the square root and division resulted
in a huge boost: from 34s to 14 seconds. The average clusters visible
hasn't change much, and a quick check in-game didn't show any issues.
At least modern gcc produces nice code for ?: (cmov), and a SIMD
cross-product uses several fewer instructions. The cross-product shaved
off 0.5-1s, but the modulo -> ?: shaved off about 3-4s, for a total of
about 10% speedup (1.09 insn/cyc vs 1.01 insn/cyc, so even perf agrees).
