#include "system.h"
#include "coretypes.h"
#include "tm.h"
+#include "timevar.h"
#include "hash-set.h"
#include "machmode.h"
#include "vec.h"
static inline bool
constraint_p (tree_code c)
{
- return (PRED_CONSTR <= c && c <= DISJ_CONSTR) || c == ERROR_MARK;
+ return ((PRED_CONSTR <= c && c <= DISJ_CONSTR)
+ || c == EXPR_PACK_EXPANSION
+ || c == ERROR_MARK);
}
/* Returns true if T is a constraint. Note that error_mark_node
return constraint_p (TREE_CODE (t));
}
-/* Make a predicate constraint from the given expression. */
-
-tree
-make_predicate_constraint (tree expr)
-{
- return build_nt (PRED_CONSTR, expr);
-}
-
/* Returns the conjunction of two constraints A and B. Note that
conjoining a non-null constraint with NULL_TREE is an identity
operation. That is, for non-null A,
return false;
}
+/* Returns true if any of the arguments in the template
+ argument list is a wildcard or wildcard pack. */
+
+bool
+contains_wildcard_p (tree args)
+{
+ for (int i = 0; i < TREE_VEC_LENGTH (args); ++i)
+ {
+ tree arg = TREE_VEC_ELT (args, i);
+ if (TREE_CODE (arg) == WILDCARD_DECL)
+ return true;
+ }
+ return false;
+}
+
+/* Build a new call expression, but don't actually generate a
+ new function call. We just want the tree, not the semantics. */
+
+inline tree
+build_call_check (tree id)
+{
+ ++processing_template_decl;
+ vec<tree, va_gc> *fargs = make_tree_vector();
+ tree call = finish_call_expr (id, &fargs, false, false, tf_none);
+ release_tree_vector (fargs);
+ --processing_template_decl;
+ return call;
+}
+
+/* Build an expression that will check a variable concept. If any
+ argument contains a wildcard, don't try to finish the variable
+ template because we can't substitute into a non-existent
+ declaration. */
+
+tree
+build_variable_check (tree id)
+{
+ gcc_assert (TREE_CODE (id) == TEMPLATE_ID_EXPR);
+ if (contains_wildcard_p (TREE_OPERAND (id, 1)))
+ return id;
+
+ ++processing_template_decl;
+ tree var = finish_template_variable (id);
+ --processing_template_decl;
+ return var;
+}
+
/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution of qualified concept names
---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
static tree
resolve_constraint_check (tree ovl, tree args)
{
+ int nerrs = 0;
tree cands = NULL_TREE;
for (tree p = ovl; p != NULL_TREE; p = OVL_NEXT (p))
{
++processing_template_decl;
tree parms = TREE_VALUE (DECL_TEMPLATE_PARMS (tmpl));
if (tree subst = coerce_template_parms (parms, args, tmpl))
- if (subst != error_mark_node)
- cands = tree_cons (subst, fn, cands);
+ {
+ if (subst == error_mark_node)
+ ++nerrs;
+ else
+ cands = tree_cons (subst, fn, cands);
+ }
--processing_template_decl;
}
- // If we didn't find a unique candidate, then this is
- // not a constraint check.
- if (!cands || TREE_CHAIN (cands))
- return NULL_TREE;
+ if (!cands)
+ /* We either had no candidates or failed deductions. */
+ return nerrs ? error_mark_node : NULL_TREE;
+ else if (TREE_CHAIN (cands))
+ /* There are multiple candidates. */
+ return error_mark_node;
return cands;
}
assuming that it works. Note that failing to deduce
will result in diagnostics. */
tree parms = INNERMOST_TEMPLATE_PARMS (DECL_TEMPLATE_PARMS (tmpl));
+ ++processing_template_decl;
tree result = coerce_template_parms (parms, args, tmpl);
+ --processing_template_decl;
if (result != error_mark_node)
{
tree decl = DECL_TEMPLATE_RESULT (tmpl);
return build_tree_list (result, decl);
}
else
- return NULL_TREE;
+ return error_mark_node;
}
namespace {
/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Lifting of concept definitions
+ Constraint implication learning
---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
-/* Part of constraint normalization. Whenever we find a reference to
- a variable concept or a call to a function concept, we lift or
- inline that concept's definition into the constraint. This ensures
- that constraints are always checked in the immediate instantiation
- context. */
+/* The implication context determines how we memoize concept checks.
+ Given two checks C1 and C2, the direction of implication depends
+ on whether we are learning implications of a conjunction or disjunction.
+ For example:
-tree lift_expression (tree);
+ template<typename T> concept bool C = ...;
+ template<typenaem T> concept bool D = C<T> && true;
-/* If the tree T has operands, then lift any concepts out of them. */
-tree
-lift_operands (tree t)
+ From this, we can learn that D<T> implies C<T>. We cannot learn,
+ without further testing, that C<T> does not imply D<T>. If, for
+ example, C<T> were defined as true, then these constraints would
+ be logically equivalent.
+
+ In rare cases, we may start with a logical equivalence. For example:
+
+ template<typename T> concept bool C = ...;
+ template<typename T> concept bool D = C<T>;
+
+ Here, we learn that C<T> implies D<T> and vice versa. */
+
+enum implication_context
+{
+ conjunction_cxt, /* C1 implies C2. */
+ disjunction_cxt, /* C2 implies C1. */
+ equivalence_cxt /* C1 implies C2, C2 implies C1. */
+};
+
+void learn_implications(tree, tree, implication_context);
+
+void
+learn_implication (tree parent, tree child, implication_context cxt)
{
- if (int n = tree_operand_length (t))
+ switch (cxt)
{
- t = copy_node (t);
- for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i)
- TREE_OPERAND (t, i) = lift_expression (TREE_OPERAND (t, i));
+ case conjunction_cxt:
+ save_subsumption_result (parent, child, true);
+ break;
+ case disjunction_cxt:
+ save_subsumption_result (child, parent, true);
+ break;
+ case equivalence_cxt:
+ save_subsumption_result (parent, child, true);
+ save_subsumption_result (child, parent, true);
+ break;
}
- return t;
}
-/* Recursively lift all operands of the function call. Also, check
- that the call target is not accidentally a variable concept
- since that's ill-formed. */
-tree
-lift_function_call (tree t)
+void
+learn_logical_operation (tree parent, tree constr, implication_context cxt)
{
- gcc_assert (TREE_CODE (t) == CALL_EXPR);
- gcc_assert (!VAR_P (CALL_EXPR_FN (t)));
- return lift_operands (t);
+ learn_implications (parent, TREE_OPERAND (constr, 0), cxt);
+ learn_implications (parent, TREE_OPERAND (constr, 1), cxt);
}
-/* Inline a function (concept) definition by substituting
- ARGS into its body. */
+void
+learn_implications (tree parent, tree constr, implication_context cxt)
+{
+ switch (TREE_CODE (constr))
+ {
+ case CHECK_CONSTR:
+ return learn_implication (parent, constr, cxt);
+
+ case CONJ_CONSTR:
+ if (cxt == disjunction_cxt)
+ return;
+ return learn_logical_operation (parent, constr, cxt);
+
+ case DISJ_CONSTR:
+ if (cxt == conjunction_cxt)
+ return;
+ return learn_logical_operation (parent, constr, cxt);
+
+ default:
+ break;
+ }
+}
+
+/* Quickly scan the top-level constraints of CONSTR to learn and
+ cache logical relations between concepts. The search does not
+ include conjunctions of disjunctions or vice versa. */
+
+void
+learn_implications (tree tmpl, tree args, tree constr)
+{
+ /* Don't memoize relations between non-dependent arguemnts. It's not
+ helpful. */
+ if (!uses_template_parms (args))
+ return;
+
+ /* Build a check constraint for the purpose of caching. */
+ tree parent = build_nt (CHECK_CONSTR, tmpl, args);
+
+ /* Start learning based on the kind of the top-level contraint. */
+ if (TREE_CODE (constr) == CONJ_CONSTR)
+ return learn_logical_operation (parent, constr, conjunction_cxt);
+ else if (TREE_CODE (constr) == DISJ_CONSTR)
+ return learn_logical_operation (parent, constr, disjunction_cxt);
+ else if (TREE_CODE (constr) == CHECK_CONSTR)
+ /* This is the rare concept alias case. */
+ return learn_implication (parent, constr, equivalence_cxt);
+}
+
+/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ Expansion of concept definitions
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
+
+/* Returns the expression of a function concept. */
+
tree
-lift_function_definition (tree fn, tree args)
+get_returned_expression (tree fn)
{
/* Extract the body of the function minus the return expression. */
tree body = DECL_SAVED_TREE (fn);
if (TREE_CODE (body) != RETURN_EXPR)
return error_mark_node;
- body = TREE_OPERAND (body, 0);
-
- /* Substitute template arguments to produce our inline expression. */
- tree result = tsubst_expr (body, args, tf_none, NULL_TREE, false);
- if (result == error_mark_node)
- return error_mark_node;
-
- return lift_expression (result);
+ return TREE_OPERAND (body, 0);
}
-/* Inline a reference to a function concept. */
-tree
-lift_call_expression (tree t)
-{
- /* Try to resolve this function call as a concept. If not, then
- it can be returned as-is. */
- tree check = resolve_constraint_check (t);
- if (!check)
- return lift_function_call (t);
- if (check == error_mark_node)
- return error_mark_node;
-
- tree fn = TREE_VALUE (check);
- tree args = TREE_PURPOSE (check);
- return lift_function_definition (fn, args);
-}
+/* Returns the initializer of a variable concept. */
tree
-lift_variable_initializer (tree var, tree args)
+get_variable_initializer (tree var)
{
- /* Extract the body from the variable initializer. */
tree init = DECL_INITIAL (var);
if (!init)
return error_mark_node;
+ return init;
+}
- /* Substitute the arguments to form our new inline expression. */
- tree result = tsubst_expr (init, args, tf_none, NULL_TREE, false);
- if (result == error_mark_node)
- return error_mark_node;
+/* Returns the definition of a variable or function concept. */
- return lift_expression (result);
+tree
+get_concept_definition (tree decl)
+{
+ if (TREE_CODE (decl) == VAR_DECL)
+ return get_variable_initializer (decl);
+ else if (TREE_CODE (decl) == FUNCTION_DECL)
+ return get_returned_expression (decl);
+ gcc_unreachable ();
}
-/* Determine if a template-id is a variable concept and inline. */
+int expansion_level = 0;
-tree
-lift_template_id (tree t)
+struct expanding_concept_sentinel
{
- if (tree info = resolve_variable_concept_check (t))
- {
- tree decl = TREE_VALUE (info);
- tree args = TREE_PURPOSE (info);
- return lift_variable_initializer (decl, args);
- }
+ expanding_concept_sentinel ()
+ {
+ ++expansion_level;
+ }
- /* Check that we didn't refer to a function concept like
- a variable.
+ ~expanding_concept_sentinel()
+ {
+ --expansion_level;
+ }
+};
- TODO: Add a note on how to fix this. */
- tree tmpl = TREE_OPERAND (t, 0);
- if (TREE_CODE (tmpl) == OVERLOAD)
- {
- tree fn = OVL_FUNCTION (tmpl);
- if (TREE_CODE (fn) == TEMPLATE_DECL
- && DECL_DECLARED_CONCEPT_P (DECL_TEMPLATE_RESULT (fn)))
- {
- error_at (location_of (t),
- "invalid reference to function concept %qD", fn);
- return error_mark_node;
- }
- }
- return t;
-}
+} /* namespace */
-/* Lift any constraints appearing in a nested requirement of
- a requires-expression. */
-tree
-lift_requires_expression (tree t)
+/* Returns true when a concept is being expanded. */
+
+bool
+expanding_concept()
{
- tree parms = TREE_OPERAND (t, 0);
- tree reqs = TREE_OPERAND (t, 1);
- tree result = NULL_TREE;
- for (; reqs != NULL_TREE; reqs = TREE_CHAIN (reqs))
- {
- tree req = TREE_VALUE (reqs);
- if (TREE_CODE (req) == NESTED_REQ)
- {
- tree expr = lift_expression (TREE_OPERAND (req, 0));
- req = finish_nested_requirement (expr);
- }
- result = tree_cons (NULL_TREE, req, result);
- }
- return finish_requires_expr (parms, result);
+ return expansion_level > 0;
}
-/* Inline references to specializations of concepts. */
+/* Expand a concept declaration (not a template) and its arguments to
+ a constraint defined by the concept's initializer or definition. */
+
tree
-lift_expression (tree t)
+expand_concept (tree decl, tree args)
{
- if (t == NULL_TREE)
- return NULL_TREE;
+ expanding_concept_sentinel sentinel;
- if (t == error_mark_node)
- return error_mark_node;
+ if (TREE_CODE (decl) == TEMPLATE_DECL)
+ decl = DECL_TEMPLATE_RESULT (decl);
+ tree tmpl = DECL_TI_TEMPLATE (decl);
- /* Concepts can be referred to by call or variable. All other
- nodes are preserved. */
- switch (TREE_CODE (t))
- {
- case CALL_EXPR:
- return lift_call_expression (t);
+ /* Check for a previous specialization. */
+ if (tree spec = get_concept_expansion (tmpl, args))
+ return spec;
- case TEMPLATE_ID_EXPR:
- return lift_template_id (t);
+ /* Substitute the arguments to form a new definition expression. */
+ tree def = get_concept_definition (decl);
- case REQUIRES_EXPR:
- return lift_requires_expression (t);
-
- case EXPR_PACK_EXPANSION:
- /* Use copy_node rather than make_pack_expansion so that
- PACK_EXPANSION_PARAMETER_PACKS stays the same. */
- t = copy_node (t);
- SET_PACK_EXPANSION_PATTERN
- (t, lift_expression (PACK_EXPANSION_PATTERN (t)));
- return t;
-
- case TREE_LIST:
- {
- t = copy_node (t);
- TREE_VALUE (t) = lift_expression (TREE_VALUE (t));
- TREE_CHAIN (t) = lift_expression (TREE_CHAIN (t));
- return t;
- }
+ ++processing_template_decl;
+ tree result = tsubst_expr (def, args, tf_none, NULL_TREE, true);
+ --processing_template_decl;
+ if (result == error_mark_node)
+ return error_mark_node;
- default:
- return lift_operands (t);
- }
+ /* And lastly, normalize it, check for implications, and save
+ the specialization for later. */
+ tree norm = normalize_expression (result);
+ learn_implications (tmpl, args, norm);
+ return save_concept_expansion (tmpl, args, norm);
}
-/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Transformation of expressions into constraints
----------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
-
-/* Part of constraint normalization. The following functions rewrite
- expressions as constraints. */
-
-tree transform_expression (tree);
-
-/* Check that the logical-or or logical-and expression does
- not result in a call to a user-defined user-defined operator
- (temp.constr.op). Returns true if the logical operator is
- admissible and false otherwise. */
-bool
-check_logical_expr (tree t)
-{
- /* We can't do much for type dependent expressions. */
- if (type_dependent_expression_p (t))
- return true;
+/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ Stepwise normalization of expressions
- /* Resolve the logical operator. Note that template processing is
- disabled so we get the actual call or target expression back.
- not_processing_template_sentinel sentinel.
-
- TODO: This check is actually subsumed by the requirement that
- constraint operands have type bool. I'm not sure we need it
- unless we allow conversions. */
- tree arg1 = TREE_OPERAND (t, 0);
- tree arg2 = TREE_OPERAND (t, 1);
- tree ovl = NULL_TREE;
- tree expr = build_x_binary_op (EXPR_LOC_OR_LOC (arg2, input_location),
- TREE_CODE (t),
- arg1, TREE_CODE (arg1),
- arg2, TREE_CODE (arg2),
- &ovl,
- tf_none);
- if (TREE_CODE (expr) != TREE_CODE (t))
- {
- error ("user-defined operator %qs in constraint %q+E",
- operator_name_info[TREE_CODE (t)].name, t);
- return false;
- }
- return true;
-}
+This set of functions will transform an expression into a constraint
+in a sequence of steps. Normalization does not not look into concept
+definitions.
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
/* Transform a logical-or or logical-and expression into either
a conjunction or disjunction. */
tree
-xform_logical (tree t, tree_code c)
+normalize_logical_operation (tree t, tree_code c)
{
- if (!check_logical_expr (t))
- return error_mark_node;
- tree t0 = transform_expression (TREE_OPERAND (t, 0));
- tree t1 = transform_expression (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1));
+ tree t0 = normalize_expression (TREE_OPERAND (t, 0));
+ tree t1 = normalize_expression (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1));
return build_nt (c, t0, t1);
}
for its expression. */
inline tree
-xform_simple_requirement (tree t)
+normalize_simple_requirement (tree t)
{
return build_nt (EXPR_CONSTR, TREE_OPERAND (t, 0));
}
/* A type requirement T introduce a type constraint for its type. */
inline tree
-xform_type_requirement (tree t)
+normalize_type_requirement (tree t)
{
return build_nt (TYPE_CONSTR, TREE_OPERAND (t, 0));
}
includes an exception constraint. */
tree
-xform_compound_requirement (tree t)
+normalize_compound_requirement (tree t)
{
tree expr = TREE_OPERAND (t, 0);
tree constr = build_nt (EXPR_CONSTR, TREE_OPERAND (t, 0));
will guarantee that the constraint is never satisfied. */
inline tree
-xform_nested_requirement (tree t)
+normalize_nested_requirement (tree t)
{
- return transform_expression (TREE_OPERAND (t, 0));
+ return normalize_expression (TREE_OPERAND (t, 0));
}
/* Transform a requirement T into one or more constraints. */
tree
-xform_requirement (tree t)
+normalize_requirement (tree t)
{
switch (TREE_CODE (t))
{
case SIMPLE_REQ:
- return xform_simple_requirement (t);
+ return normalize_simple_requirement (t);
case TYPE_REQ:
- return xform_type_requirement (t);
+ return normalize_type_requirement (t);
case COMPOUND_REQ:
- return xform_compound_requirement (t);
+ return normalize_compound_requirement (t);
case NESTED_REQ:
- return xform_nested_requirement (t);
+ return normalize_nested_requirement (t);
default:
gcc_unreachable ();
constraints. */
tree
-xform_requirements (tree t)
+normalize_requirements (tree t)
{
tree result = NULL_TREE;
for (; t; t = TREE_CHAIN (t))
{
- tree constr = xform_requirement (TREE_VALUE (t));
+ tree constr = normalize_requirement (TREE_VALUE (t));
result = conjoin_constraints (result, constr);
}
return result;
}
-/* Transform a requires-expression into a parameterized constraint. */
+/* The normal form of a requires-expression is a parameterized
+ constraint having the same parameters and a conjunction of
+ constraints representing the normal form of requirements. */
tree
-xform_requires_expr (tree t)
+normalize_requires_expression (tree t)
{
- tree operand = xform_requirements (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1));
+ tree operand = normalize_requirements (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1));
if (tree parms = TREE_OPERAND (t, 0))
return build_nt (PARM_CONSTR, parms, operand);
else
return operand;
}
-/* Transform an expression into an atomic predicate constraint.
- After substitution, the expression of a predicate constraint
- shall have type bool (temp.constr.pred). For non-type-dependent
- expressions, we can check that now. */
+/* For a template-id referring to a variable concept, returns
+ a check constraint. Otherwise, returns a predicate constraint. */
tree
-xform_atomic (tree t)
+normalize_template_id_expression (tree t)
{
- if (TREE_TYPE (t) && !type_dependent_expression_p (t))
- {
- tree type = cv_unqualified (TREE_TYPE (t));
- if (!same_type_p (type, boolean_type_node))
- {
- error ("predicate constraint %q+E does not have type %<bool%>", t);
+ if (tree info = resolve_variable_concept_check (t))
+ {
+ if (info == error_mark_node)
+ {
+ /* We get this when the template arguments don't match
+ the variable concept. */
+ error ("invalid reference to concept %qE", t);
+ return error_mark_node;
+ }
+
+ tree decl = TREE_VALUE (info);
+ tree args = TREE_PURPOSE (info);
+ return build_nt (CHECK_CONSTR, decl, args);
+ }
+
+ /* Check that we didn't refer to a function concept like a variable. */
+ tree tmpl = TREE_OPERAND (t, 0);
+ if (TREE_CODE (tmpl) == OVERLOAD)
+ {
+ tree fn = OVL_FUNCTION (tmpl);
+ if (TREE_CODE (fn) == TEMPLATE_DECL
+ && DECL_DECLARED_CONCEPT_P (DECL_TEMPLATE_RESULT (fn)))
+ {
+ error_at (location_of (t),
+ "invalid reference to function concept %qD", fn);
+ return error_mark_node;
+ }
+ }
+
+ return build_nt (PRED_CONSTR, t);
+}
+
+/* For a call expression to a function concept, returns a check
+ constraint. Otherwise, returns a predicate constraint. */
+
+tree
+normalize_call_expression (tree t)
+{
+ /* Try to resolve this function call as a concept. If not, then
+ it can be returned as a predicate constraint. */
+ tree check = resolve_constraint_check (t);
+ if (!check)
+ return build_nt (PRED_CONSTR, t);
+ if (check == error_mark_node)
+ {
+ /* TODO: Improve diagnostics. We could report why the reference
+ is invalid. */
+ error ("invalid reference to concept %qE", t);
+ return error_mark_node;
+ }
+
+ tree fn = TREE_VALUE (check);
+ tree args = TREE_PURPOSE (check);
+ return build_nt (CHECK_CONSTR, fn, args);
+}
+
+/* If T is a call to an overloaded && or || operator, diagnose that
+ as a non-SFINAEable error. Returns true if an error is emitted.
+
+ TODO: It would be better to diagnose this at the point of definition,
+ if possible. Perhaps we should immediately do a first-pass normalization
+ of a concept definition to catch obvious non-dependent errors like
+ this. */
+
+bool
+check_for_logical_overloads (tree t)
+{
+ if (TREE_CODE (t) != CALL_EXPR)
+ return false;
+
+ tree fn = CALL_EXPR_FN (t);
+
+ /* For member calls, try extracting the function from the
+ component ref. */
+ if (TREE_CODE (fn) == COMPONENT_REF)
+ {
+ fn = TREE_OPERAND (fn, 1);
+ if (TREE_CODE (fn) == BASELINK)
+ fn = BASELINK_FUNCTIONS (fn);
+ }
+
+ if (TREE_CODE (fn) != FUNCTION_DECL)
+ return false;
+
+ if (DECL_OVERLOADED_OPERATOR_P (fn))
+ {
+ location_t loc = EXPR_LOC_OR_LOC (t, input_location);
+ error_at (loc, "constraint %qE, uses overloaded operator", t);
+ return true;
+ }
+
+ return false;
+}
+
+/* The normal form of an atom depends on the expression. The normal
+ form of a function call to a function concept is a check constraint
+ for that concept. The normal form of a reference to a variable
+ concept is a check constraint for that concept. Otherwise, the
+ constraint is a predicate constraint. */
+
+tree
+normalize_atom (tree t)
+{
+ /* We can get constraints pushed down through pack expansions, so
+ just return them. */
+ if (constraint_p (t))
+ return t;
+
+ tree type = TREE_TYPE (t);
+ if (!type || type_unknown_p (t) || TREE_CODE (type) == TEMPLATE_TYPE_PARM)
+ ;
+ else if (!dependent_type_p (type))
+ {
+ if (check_for_logical_overloads (t))
return error_mark_node;
- }
- }
+
+ type = cv_unqualified (type);
+ if (!same_type_p (type, boolean_type_node))
+ {
+ error ("predicate constraint %q+E does not have type %<bool%>", t);
+ return error_mark_node;
+ }
+ }
+
+ if (TREE_CODE (t) == TEMPLATE_ID_EXPR)
+ return normalize_template_id_expression (t);
+ if (TREE_CODE (t) == CALL_EXPR)
+ return normalize_call_expression (t);
return build_nt (PRED_CONSTR, t);
}
leaves of the constraint so that partial ordering will work. */
tree
-xform_pack_expansion (tree t)
+normalize_pack_expansion (tree t)
{
- tree pat = transform_expression (PACK_EXPANSION_PATTERN (t));
+ tree pat = normalize_expression (PACK_EXPANSION_PATTERN (t));
return push_down_pack_expansion (t, pat);
}
/* Transform an expression into a constraint. */
tree
-xform_expr (tree t)
+normalize_any_expression (tree t)
{
switch (TREE_CODE (t))
{
case TRUTH_ANDIF_EXPR:
- return xform_logical (t, CONJ_CONSTR);
+ return normalize_logical_operation (t, CONJ_CONSTR);
case TRUTH_ORIF_EXPR:
- return xform_logical (t, DISJ_CONSTR);
+ return normalize_logical_operation (t, DISJ_CONSTR);
case REQUIRES_EXPR:
- return xform_requires_expr (t);
+ return normalize_requires_expression (t);
case BIND_EXPR:
- return transform_expression (BIND_EXPR_BODY (t));
+ return normalize_expression (BIND_EXPR_BODY (t));
case EXPR_PACK_EXPANSION:
- return xform_pack_expansion (t);
+ return normalize_pack_expansion (t);
default:
/* All other constraints are atomic. */
- return xform_atomic (t);
+ return normalize_atom (t);
}
}
/* Transform a statement into an expression. */
-
tree
-xform_stmt (tree t)
+normalize_any_statement (tree t)
{
switch (TREE_CODE (t))
{
case RETURN_EXPR:
- return transform_expression (TREE_OPERAND (t, 0));
+ return normalize_expression (TREE_OPERAND (t, 0));
default:
gcc_unreachable ();
}
/* Reduction rules for the declaration T. */
tree
-xform_decl (tree t)
+normalize_any_declaration (tree t)
{
switch (TREE_CODE (t))
{
case VAR_DECL:
- return xform_atomic (t);
+ return normalize_atom (t);
default:
gcc_unreachable ();
}
return error_mark_node;
}
-/* Transform a lifted expression into a constraint. This either
- returns a constraint, or it returns error_mark_node when
- a constraint cannot be formed. */
+/* Returns the normal form of a constraint expression. */
tree
-transform_expression (tree t)
+normalize_expression (tree t)
{
if (!t)
return NULL_TREE;
case tcc_binary:
case tcc_expression:
case tcc_vl_exp:
- return xform_expr (t);
+ return normalize_any_expression (t);
case tcc_statement:
- return xform_stmt (t);
+ return normalize_any_statement (t);
case tcc_declaration:
- return xform_decl (t);
+ return normalize_any_declaration (t);
case tcc_exceptional:
case tcc_constant:
case tcc_reference:
case tcc_comparison:
/* These are all atomic predicate constraints. */
- return xform_atomic (t);
+ return normalize_atom (t);
default:
/* Unhandled node kind. */
return error_mark_node;
}
+
/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Constraint normalization
---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
{
++processing_template_decl;
tree expr = PRED_CONSTR_EXPR (t);
- tree lifted = lift_expression (expr);
- tree constr = transform_expression (lifted);
+ tree constr = normalize_expression (expr);
--processing_template_decl;
return constr;
}
return error_mark_node;
}
-} /* namespace */
// -------------------------------------------------------------------------- //
ci->declarator_reqs = decl_reqs;
ci->associated_constr = conjoin_constraints (tmpl_reqs, decl_reqs);
- ++processing_template_decl;
- ci->normalized_constr = normalize_constraint (ci->associated_constr);
- --processing_template_decl;
-
- ci->assumptions = decompose_assumptions (ci->normalized_constr);
return (tree)ci;
}
namespace {
-/* Returns true if any of the arguments in the template
- argument list is a wildcard or wildcard pack. */
-bool
-contains_wildcard_p (tree args)
-{
- for (int i = 0; i < TREE_VEC_LENGTH (args); ++i)
- {
- tree arg = TREE_VEC_ELT (args, i);
- if (TREE_CODE (arg) == WILDCARD_DECL)
- return true;
- }
- return false;
-}
-
-/* Build a new call expression, but don't actually generate
- a new function call. We just want the tree, not the
- semantics. */
-inline tree
-build_call_check (tree id)
-{
- ++processing_template_decl;
- vec<tree, va_gc> *fargs = make_tree_vector();
- tree call = finish_call_expr (id, &fargs, false, false, tf_none);
- release_tree_vector (fargs);
- --processing_template_decl;
- return call;
-}
-
-/* Build an expression that will check a variable concept. If any
- argument contains a wildcard, don't try to finish the variable
- template because we can't substitute into a non-existent
- declaration. */
-tree
-build_variable_check (tree id)
-{
- gcc_assert (TREE_CODE (id) == TEMPLATE_ID_EXPR);
- if (contains_wildcard_p (TREE_OPERAND (id, 1)))
- return id;
-
- ++processing_template_decl;
- tree var = finish_template_variable (id);
- --processing_template_decl;
- return var;
-}
-
/* Construct a sequence of template arguments by prepending
ARG to REST. Either ARG or REST may be null. */
tree
Note that the constraints are neither reduced nor decomposed.
That is done only after the requires clause has been parsed
- (or not). */
+ (or not).
+
+ This will always return a CHECK_CONSTR. */
tree
finish_shorthand_constraint (tree decl, tree constr)
{
TREE_TYPE (check) = boolean_type_node;
}
- return make_predicate_constraint (check);
+ return normalize_expression (check);
}
/* Returns a conjunction of shorthand requirements for the template
/* Associate the constraint. */
tree check = build_concept_check (tmpl_decl, NULL_TREE, check_args);
- tree constr = make_predicate_constraint (check);
+ tree constr = normalize_expression (check);
TEMPLATE_PARMS_CONSTRAINTS (current_template_parms) = constr;
return parm_list;
{
if (TREE_CODE (t) == TYPE_DECL)
{
- /* A constrained parameter. */
- tmpl = DECL_TI_TEMPLATE (CONSTRAINED_PARM_CONCEPT (t));
- args = CONSTRAINED_PARM_EXTRA_ARGS (t);
+ /* A constrained parameter. Build a constraint check
+ based on the prototype parameter and then extract the
+ arguments from that. */
+ tree proto = CONSTRAINED_PARM_PROTOTYPE (t);
+ tree check = finish_shorthand_constraint (proto, t);
+ placeholder_extract_concept_and_args (check, tmpl, args);
return;
}
- gcc_assert (TREE_CODE (t) == PRED_CONSTR);
- t = PRED_CONSTR_EXPR (t);
- gcc_assert (TREE_CODE (t) == CALL_EXPR
- || TREE_CODE (t) == TEMPLATE_ID_EXPR
- || VAR_P (t));
-
- if (TREE_CODE (t) == CALL_EXPR)
- t = CALL_EXPR_FN (t);
- if (TREE_CODE (t) == TEMPLATE_ID_EXPR)
+ if (TREE_CODE (t) == CHECK_CONSTR)
{
- tmpl = TREE_OPERAND (t, 0);
- if (TREE_CODE (tmpl) == OVERLOAD)
- {
- gcc_assert (OVL_CHAIN (tmpl) == NULL_TREE);
- tmpl = OVL_FUNCTION (tmpl);
- }
- args = TREE_OPERAND (t, 1);
- }
- else if (DECL_P (t))
- {
- tmpl = DECL_TI_TEMPLATE (t);
- args = DECL_TI_ARGS (t);
+ tree decl = CHECK_CONSTR_CONCEPT (t);
+ tmpl = DECL_TI_TEMPLATE (decl);
+ args = CHECK_CONSTR_ARGS (t);
+ return;
}
- else
+
gcc_unreachable ();
}
/* Returns true iff the placeholders C1 and C2 are equivalent. C1
- and C2 can be either PRED_CONSTR_EXPR or TEMPLATE_TYPE_PARM. */
+ and C2 can be either CHECK_CONSTR or TEMPLATE_TYPE_PARM. */
bool
equivalent_placeholder_constraints (tree c1, tree c2)
return true;
if (!c1 || !c2)
return false;
+ if (c1 == error_mark_node || c2 == error_mark_node)
+ /* We get here during satisfaction; when a deduction constraint
+ fails, substitution can produce an error_mark_node for the
+ placeholder constraints. */
+ return false;
tree t1, t2, a1, a2;
placeholder_extract_concept_and_args (c1, t1, a1);
if (t1 != t2)
return false;
- /* Skip the first argument to avoid infinite recursion on the
- placeholder auto itself. */
- bool skip1 = (TREE_CODE (c1) == PRED_CONSTR);
- bool skip2 = (TREE_CODE (c2) == PRED_CONSTR);
-
- int len1 = (a1 ? TREE_VEC_LENGTH (a1) : 0) - skip1;
- int len2 = (a2 ? TREE_VEC_LENGTH (a2) : 0) - skip2;
-
+ int len1 = TREE_VEC_LENGTH (a1);
+ int len2 = TREE_VEC_LENGTH (a2);
if (len1 != len2)
return false;
- for (int i = 0; i < len1; ++i)
- if (!cp_tree_equal (TREE_VEC_ELT (a1, i + skip1),
- TREE_VEC_ELT (a2, i + skip2)))
+ /* Skip the first argument so we don't infinitely recurse.
+ Also, they may differ in template parameter index. */
+ for (int i = 1; i < len1; ++i)
+ {
+ tree t1 = TREE_VEC_ELT (a1, i);
+ tree t2 = TREE_VEC_ELT (a2, i);
+ if (!template_args_equal (t1, t2))
return false;
+ }
return true;
}
return build_nt (PRED_CONSTR, result);
}
+/* Substitute into a check constraint. */
+
+tree
+tsubst_check_constraint (tree t, tree args,
+ tsubst_flags_t complain, tree in_decl)
+{
+ tree decl = CHECK_CONSTR_CONCEPT (t);
+ tree tmpl = DECL_TI_TEMPLATE (decl);
+ tree targs = CHECK_CONSTR_ARGS (t);
+
+ /* Substitute through by building an template-id expression
+ and then substituting into that. */
+ tree expr = build_nt(TEMPLATE_ID_EXPR, tmpl, targs);
+ ++processing_template_decl;
+ tree result = tsubst_expr (expr, args, complain, in_decl, false);
+ --processing_template_decl;
+
+ if (result == error_mark_node)
+ return error_mark_node;
+
+ /* Extract the results and rebuild the check constraint. */
+ decl = DECL_TEMPLATE_RESULT (TREE_OPERAND (result, 0));
+ args = TREE_OPERAND (result, 1);
+
+ return build_nt (CHECK_CONSTR, decl, args);
+}
+
/* Substitute into the conjunction of constraints. Returns
error_mark_node if substitution into either operand fails. */
+
tree
-tsubst_conjunction (tree t, tree args,
- tsubst_flags_t complain, tree in_decl)
+tsubst_logical_operator (tree t, tree args,
+ tsubst_flags_t complain, tree in_decl)
{
tree t0 = TREE_OPERAND (t, 0);
tree r0 = tsubst_constraint (t0, args, complain, in_decl);
+ if (r0 == error_mark_node)
+ return error_mark_node;
tree t1 = TREE_OPERAND (t, 1);
tree r1 = tsubst_constraint (t1, args, complain, in_decl);
- return build_nt (CONJ_CONSTR, r0, r1);
+ if (r1 == error_mark_node)
+ return error_mark_node;
+ return build_nt (TREE_CODE (t), r0, r1);
+}
+
+namespace {
+
+/* Substitute ARGS into the expression constraint T. */
+
+tree
+tsubst_expr_constr (tree t, tree args, tsubst_flags_t complain, tree in_decl)
+{
+ cp_unevaluated guard;
+ tree expr = EXPR_CONSTR_EXPR (t);
+ tree ret = tsubst_expr (expr, args, complain, in_decl, false);
+ if (ret == error_mark_node)
+ return error_mark_node;
+ return build_nt (EXPR_CONSTR, ret);
+}
+
+/* Substitute ARGS into the type constraint T. */
+
+tree
+tsubst_type_constr (tree t, tree args, tsubst_flags_t complain, tree in_decl)
+{
+ tree type = TYPE_CONSTR_TYPE (t);
+ tree ret = tsubst (type, args, complain, in_decl);
+ if (ret == error_mark_node)
+ return error_mark_node;
+ return build_nt (TYPE_CONSTR, ret);
+}
+
+/* Substitute ARGS into the implicit conversion constraint T. */
+
+tree
+tsubst_implicit_conversion_constr (tree t, tree args, tsubst_flags_t complain,
+ tree in_decl)
+{
+ cp_unevaluated guard;
+ tree expr = ICONV_CONSTR_EXPR (t);
+ tree type = ICONV_CONSTR_TYPE (t);
+ tree new_expr = tsubst_expr (expr, args, complain, in_decl, false);
+ if (new_expr == error_mark_node)
+ return error_mark_node;
+ tree new_type = tsubst (type, args, complain, in_decl);
+ if (new_type == error_mark_node)
+ return error_mark_node;
+ return build_nt (ICONV_CONSTR, new_expr, new_type);
+}
+
+/* Substitute ARGS into the argument deduction constraint T. */
+
+tree
+tsubst_argument_deduction_constr (tree t, tree args, tsubst_flags_t complain,
+ tree in_decl)
+{
+ cp_unevaluated guard;
+ tree expr = DEDUCT_CONSTR_EXPR (t);
+ tree pattern = DEDUCT_CONSTR_PATTERN (t);
+ tree autos = DEDUCT_CONSTR_PLACEHOLDER(t);
+ tree new_expr = tsubst_expr (expr, args, complain, in_decl, false);
+ if (new_expr == error_mark_node)
+ return error_mark_node;
+ /* It seems like substituting through the pattern will not affect the
+ placeholders. We should (?) be able to reuse the existing list
+ without any problems. If not, then we probably want to create a
+ new list of placeholders and then instantiate the pattern using
+ those. */
+ tree new_pattern = tsubst (pattern, args, complain, in_decl);
+ if (new_pattern == error_mark_node)
+ return error_mark_node;
+ return build_nt (DEDUCT_CONSTR, new_expr, new_pattern, autos);
}
-/* Substitute ARGS into the constraint T. */
+/* Substitute ARGS into the exception constraint T. */
+
tree
-tsubst_constraint (tree t, tree args, tsubst_flags_t complain, tree in_decl)
+tsubst_exception_constr (tree t, tree args, tsubst_flags_t complain,
+ tree in_decl)
{
- if (t == NULL_TREE)
- return t;
- if (TREE_CODE (t) == CONJ_CONSTR)
- return tsubst_conjunction (t, args, complain, in_decl);
- else if (TREE_CODE (t) == PRED_CONSTR)
- return tsubst_predicate_constraint (t, args, complain, in_decl);
- else
- gcc_unreachable ();
- return error_mark_node;
+ cp_unevaluated guard;
+ tree expr = EXCEPT_CONSTR_EXPR (t);
+ tree ret = tsubst_expr (expr, args, complain, in_decl, false);
+ if (ret == error_mark_node)
+ return error_mark_node;
+ return build_nt (EXCEPT_CONSTR, ret);
}
-namespace {
-
/* A subroutine of tsubst_constraint_variables. Register local
specializations for each of parameter in PARMS and its
corresponding substituted constraint variable in VARS.
Returns VARS. */
+
tree
declare_constraint_vars (tree parms, tree vars)
{
Note that the caller must establish a local specialization stack
prior to calling this function since this substitution will
declare the substituted parameters. */
+
tree
tsubst_constraint_variables (tree t, tree args,
tsubst_flags_t complain, tree in_decl)
return declare_constraint_vars (t, vars);
}
+/* Substitute ARGS into the parameterized constraint T. */
+
+tree
+tsubst_parameterized_constraint (tree t, tree args,
+ tsubst_flags_t complain, tree in_decl)
+{
+ local_specialization_stack stack;
+ tree vars = tsubst_constraint_variables (PARM_CONSTR_PARMS (t),
+ args, complain, in_decl);
+ if (vars == error_mark_node)
+ return error_mark_node;
+ tree expr = tsubst_constraint (PARM_CONSTR_OPERAND (t), args,
+ complain, in_decl);
+ if (expr == error_mark_node)
+ return error_mark_node;
+ return build_nt (PARM_CONSTR, vars, expr);
+}
+
/* Substitute ARGS into the simple requirement T. Note that
substitution may result in an ill-formed expression without
causing the program to be ill-formed. In such cases, the
requirement wraps an error_mark_node. */
+
inline tree
tsubst_simple_requirement (tree t, tree args,
tsubst_flags_t complain, tree in_decl)
return finish_nested_requirement (expr);
}
+/* Substitute ARGS into the requirement T. */
+
inline tree
tsubst_requirement (tree t, tree args, tsubst_flags_t complain, tree in_decl)
{
r = tree_cons (NULL_TREE, e, r);
t = TREE_CHAIN (t);
}
- return r;
+ /* Ensure that the order of constraints is the same as the original. */
+ return nreverse (r);
}
} /* namespace */
/* Substitute ARGS into the constraint information CI, producing a new
constraint record. */
+
tree
tsubst_constraint_info (tree t, tree args,
tsubst_flags_t complain, tree in_decl)
return build_constraints (tmpl_constr, decl_constr);
}
+/* Substitute ARGS into the constraint T. */
+
+tree
+tsubst_constraint (tree t, tree args, tsubst_flags_t complain, tree in_decl)
+{
+ if (t == NULL_TREE)
+ return t;
+ switch (TREE_CODE (t))
+ {
+ case PRED_CONSTR:
+ return tsubst_predicate_constraint (t, args, complain, in_decl);
+ case CHECK_CONSTR:
+ return tsubst_check_constraint (t, args, complain, in_decl);
+ case CONJ_CONSTR:
+ case DISJ_CONSTR:
+ return tsubst_logical_operator (t, args, complain, in_decl);
+ case PARM_CONSTR:
+ return tsubst_parameterized_constraint (t, args, complain, in_decl);
+ case EXPR_CONSTR:
+ return tsubst_expr_constr (t, args, complain, in_decl);
+ case TYPE_CONSTR:
+ return tsubst_type_constr (t, args, complain, in_decl);
+ case ICONV_CONSTR:
+ return tsubst_implicit_conversion_constr (t, args, complain, in_decl);
+ case DEDUCT_CONSTR:
+ return tsubst_argument_deduction_constr (t, args, complain, in_decl);
+ case EXCEPT_CONSTR:
+ return tsubst_exception_constr (t, args, complain, in_decl);
+ default:
+ gcc_unreachable ();
+ }
+ return error_mark_node;
+}
/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Constraint satisfaction
gen_elem_of_pack_expansion_instantiation will check that each element of
the expansion is satisfied. */
tree exprs = tsubst_pack_expansion (t, args, complain, in_decl);
+
if (exprs == error_mark_node)
return boolean_false_node;
- int n = TREE_VEC_LENGTH (exprs);
- for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i)
+ /* TODO: It might be better to normalize each expanded term
+ and evaluate them separately. That would provide better
+ opportunities for diagnostics. */
+ for (int i = 0; i < TREE_VEC_LENGTH (exprs); ++i)
if (TREE_VEC_ELT (exprs, i) != boolean_true_node)
return boolean_false_node;
return boolean_true_node;
satisfy_predicate_constraint (tree t, tree args,
tsubst_flags_t complain, tree in_decl)
{
- tree original = TREE_OPERAND (t, 0);
+ tree expr = TREE_OPERAND (t, 0);
/* We should never have a naked pack expansion in a predicate constraint. */
- gcc_assert (TREE_CODE (original) != EXPR_PACK_EXPANSION);
+ gcc_assert (TREE_CODE (expr) != EXPR_PACK_EXPANSION);
- tree expr = tsubst_expr (original, args, complain, in_decl, false);
+ /* If substitution into the expression fails, the constraint
+ is not satisfied. */
+ expr = tsubst_expr (expr, args, complain, in_decl, false);
if (expr == error_mark_node)
return boolean_false_node;
return boolean_false_node;
}
- tree value = cxx_constant_value (expr);
- return value;
+ return cxx_constant_value (expr);
+}
+
+/* A concept check constraint like C<CARGS> is satisfied if substituting ARGS
+ into CARGS succeeds and C is satisfied for the resulting arguments. */
+
+tree
+satisfy_check_constraint (tree t, tree args,
+ tsubst_flags_t complain, tree in_decl)
+{
+ tree decl = CHECK_CONSTR_CONCEPT (t);
+ tree tmpl = DECL_TI_TEMPLATE (decl);
+ tree cargs = CHECK_CONSTR_ARGS (t);
+
+ /* Instantiate the concept check arguments. */
+ tree targs = tsubst (cargs, args, tf_none, NULL_TREE);
+ if (targs == error_mark_node)
+ return boolean_false_node;
+
+ /* Search for a previous value. */
+ if (tree prev = lookup_concept_satisfaction (tmpl, targs))
+ return prev;
+
+ /* Expand the concept; failure here implies non-satisfaction. */
+ tree def = expand_concept (decl, targs);
+ if (def == error_mark_node)
+ return memoize_concept_satisfaction (tmpl, args, boolean_false_node);
+
+ /* Recursively satisfy the constraint. */
+ tree result = satisfy_constraint_1 (def, targs, complain, in_decl);
+ return memoize_concept_satisfaction (tmpl, targs, result);
}
/* Check an expression constraint. The constraint is satisfied if
return boolean_false_node;
if (!perform_deferred_access_checks (tf_none))
return boolean_false_node;
-
return boolean_true_node;
}
return boolean_false_node;
if (!perform_deferred_access_checks (complain))
return boolean_false_node;
-
return boolean_true_node;
}
{
tree t0 = satisfy_constraint_1 (TREE_OPERAND (t, 0), args, complain, in_decl);
if (t0 == boolean_false_node)
- return t0;
- tree t1 = satisfy_constraint_1 (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1), args, complain, in_decl);
- if (t1 == boolean_false_node)
- return t1;
- return boolean_true_node;
+ return boolean_false_node;
+ return satisfy_constraint_1 (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1), args, complain, in_decl);
}
/* Check that the disjunction of constraints is satisfied. Note
tree t0 = satisfy_constraint_1 (TREE_OPERAND (t, 0), args, complain, in_decl);
if (t0 == boolean_true_node)
return boolean_true_node;
- tree t1 = satisfy_constraint_1 (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1), args, complain, in_decl);
- if (t1 == boolean_true_node)
- return boolean_true_node;
- return boolean_false_node;
+ return satisfy_constraint_1 (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1), args, complain, in_decl);
}
/* Dispatch to an appropriate satisfaction routine depending on the
case PRED_CONSTR:
return satisfy_predicate_constraint (t, args, complain, in_decl);
+ case CHECK_CONSTR:
+ return satisfy_check_constraint (t, args, complain, in_decl);
+
case EXPR_CONSTR:
return satisfy_expression_constraint (t, args, complain, in_decl);
tree
satisfy_constraint (tree t, tree args)
{
+ auto_timevar time (TV_CONSTRAINT_SAT);
+
/* Turn off template processing. Constraint satisfaction only applies
- to non-dependent terms, so we want full checking here. */
- processing_template_decl_sentinel sentinel (true);
+ to non-dependent terms, so we want to ensure full checking here. */
+ processing_template_decl_sentinel proc (true);
+
/* Avoid early exit in tsubst and tsubst_copy from null args; since earlier
substitution was done with processing_template_decl forced on, there will
be expressions that still need semantic processing, possibly buried in
decltype or a template argument. */
if (args == NULL_TREE)
args = make_tree_vec (1);
+
return satisfy_constraint_1 (t, args, tf_none, NULL_TREE);
}
if (args && uses_template_parms (args))
return boolean_true_node;
- /* Invalid requirements cannot be satisfied. */
- if (!valid_constraints_p (ci))
- return boolean_false_node;
+ /* Check if we've seen a previous result. */
+ if (tree prev = lookup_constraint_satisfaction (ci, args))
+ return prev;
- return satisfy_constraint (CI_NORMALIZED_CONSTRAINTS (ci), args);
+ /* Actually test for satisfaction. */
+ tree result = satisfy_constraint (CI_ASSOCIATED_CONSTRAINTS (ci), args);
+ return memoize_constraint_satisfaction (ci, args, result);
}
} /* namespace */
evaluate_constraints (tree constr, tree args)
{
gcc_assert (constraint_p (constr));
- return satisfy_constraint (normalize_constraint (constr), args);
+ return satisfy_constraint (constr, args);
}
/* Evaluate the function concept FN by substituting its own args
tree
evaluate_function_concept (tree fn, tree args)
{
- ++processing_template_decl;
- /* We lift using DECL_TI_ARGS because we want to delay producing
- non-dependent expressions until we're doing satisfaction. We can't just
- go without any substitution because we need to lower the level of 'auto's
- in type deduction constraints. */
- tree constr = transform_expression (lift_function_definition
- (fn, DECL_TI_ARGS (fn)));
- --processing_template_decl;
+ tree constr = build_nt (CHECK_CONSTR, fn, args);
return satisfy_constraint (constr, args);
}
boolean_false_node otherwise. */
tree
-evaluate_variable_concept (tree decl, tree args)
+evaluate_variable_concept (tree var, tree args)
{
- ++processing_template_decl;
- tree constr = transform_expression (lift_variable_initializer
- (decl, DECL_TI_ARGS (decl)));
- --processing_template_decl;
+ tree constr = build_nt (CHECK_CONSTR, var, args);
return satisfy_constraint (constr, args);
}
tree
evaluate_constraint_expression (tree expr, tree args)
{
- ++processing_template_decl;
- tree constr = transform_expression (lift_expression (expr));
- --processing_template_decl;
+ tree constr = normalize_expression (expr);
return satisfy_constraint (constr, args);
}
} /* namespace */
-
/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Semantic analysis of requires-expressions
---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
/* Returns true when the the constraints in A subsume those in B. */
+
bool
subsumes_constraints (tree a, tree b)
{
Returns 1 if A is more constrained than B, -1 if B is more constrained
than A, and 0 otherwise. */
+
int
more_constrained (tree d1, tree d2)
{
/* Returns true if D1 is at least as constrained as D2. That is, the
associated constraints of D1 subsume those of D2, or both declarations
are unconstrained. */
+
bool
at_least_as_constrained (tree d1, tree d2)
{
/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Constraint diagnostics
+
+FIXME: Normalize expressions into constraints before evaluating them.
+This should be the general pattern for all such diagnostics.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
-/* The diagnosis of constraints performs a combination of
- normalization and satisfaction testing. We recursively
- walk through the conjunction (or disjunctions) of associated
- constraints, testing each sub-expression in turn.
+/* The number of detailed constraint failures. */
- We currently restrict diagnostics to just the top-level
- conjunctions within the associated constraints. A fully
- recursive walk is possible, but it can generate a lot
- of errors. */
+int constraint_errors = 0;
+/* Do not generate errors after diagnosing this number of constraint
+ failures.
-namespace {
+ FIXME: This is a really arbitrary number. Provide better control of
+ constraint diagnostics with a command line option. */
-void diagnose_expression (location_t, tree, tree);
-void diagnose_constraint (location_t, tree, tree);
+int constraint_thresh = 20;
-/* Diagnose a conjunction of constraints. */
-void
-diagnose_logical_operation (location_t loc, tree t, tree args)
+
+/* Returns true if we should elide the diagnostic for a constraint failure.
+ This is the case when the number of errors has exceeded the pre-configured
+ threshold. */
+
+inline bool
+elide_constraint_failure_p ()
+{
+ bool ret = constraint_thresh <= constraint_errors;
+ ++constraint_errors;
+ return ret;
+}
+
+/* Returns the number of undiagnosed errors. */
+
+inline int
+undiagnosed_constraint_failures ()
{
- diagnose_expression (loc, TREE_OPERAND (t, 0), args);
- diagnose_expression (loc, TREE_OPERAND (t, 0), args);
+ return constraint_errors - constraint_thresh;
}
-/* Determine if the trait expression T is satisfied by ARGS.
- Emit a precise diagnostic if it is not. */
+/* The diagnosis of constraints performs a combination of normalization
+ and satisfaction testing. We recursively walk through the conjunction or
+ disjunction of associated constraints, testing each sub-constraint in
+ turn. */
+
+namespace {
+
+void diagnose_constraint (location_t, tree, tree, tree);
+
+/* Emit a specific diagnostics for a failed trait. */
+
void
-diagnose_trait_expression (location_t loc, tree t, tree args)
+diagnose_trait_expression (location_t loc, tree, tree cur, tree args)
{
- if (constraint_expression_satisfied_p (t, args))
+ if (constraint_expression_satisfied_p (cur, args))
+ return;
+ if (elide_constraint_failure_p())
return;
- /* Rebuild the trait expression so we can diagnose the
- specific failure. */
+ tree expr = PRED_CONSTR_EXPR (cur);
++processing_template_decl;
- tree expr = tsubst_expr (t, args, tf_none, NULL_TREE, false);
+ expr = tsubst_expr (expr, args, tf_none, NULL_TREE, false);
--processing_template_decl;
tree t1 = TRAIT_EXPR_TYPE1 (expr);
tree t2 = TRAIT_EXPR_TYPE2 (expr);
- switch (TRAIT_EXPR_KIND (t))
+ switch (TRAIT_EXPR_KIND (expr))
{
case CPTK_HAS_NOTHROW_ASSIGN:
inform (loc, " %qT is not nothrow copy assignable", t1);
}
}
-/* Determine if the call expression T, when normalized as a constraint,
- is satisfied by ARGS.
+/* Diagnose the expression of a predicate constraint. */
- TODO: If T is refers to a concept, We could recursively analyze
- its definition to identify the exact failure, but that could
- emit a *lot* of error messages (defeating the purpose of
- improved diagnostics). Consider adding a flag to control the
- depth of diagnostics. */
void
-diagnose_call_expression (location_t loc, tree t, tree args)
+diagnose_other_expression (location_t loc, tree, tree cur, tree args)
{
- if (constraint_expression_satisfied_p (t, args))
+ if (constraint_expression_satisfied_p (cur, args))
return;
-
- /* Rebuild the expression for the purpose of diagnostics. */
- ++processing_template_decl;
- tree expr = tsubst_expr (t, args, tf_none, NULL_TREE, false);
- --processing_template_decl;
-
- /* If the function call is known to be a concept check, then
- diagnose it differently (i.e., we may recurse). */
- if (resolve_constraint_check (t))
- inform (loc, " concept %qE was not satisfied", expr);
- else
- inform (loc, " %qE evaluated to false", expr);
-}
-
-/* Determine if the template-id T, when normalized as a constraint
- is satisfied by ARGS. */
-void
-diagnose_template_id (location_t loc, tree t, tree args)
-{
- /* Check for invalid template-ids. */
- if (!variable_template_p (TREE_OPERAND (t, 0)))
- {
- inform (loc, " invalid constraint %qE", t);
- return;
- }
-
- if (constraint_expression_satisfied_p (t, args))
+ if (elide_constraint_failure_p())
return;
+ inform (loc, "%qE evaluated to false", cur);
+}
- /* Rebuild the expression for the purpose of diagnostics. */
- ++processing_template_decl;
- tree expr = tsubst_expr (t, args, tf_none, NULL_TREE, false);
- --processing_template_decl;
+/* Do our best to infer meaning from predicates. */
- tree var = DECL_TEMPLATE_RESULT (TREE_OPERAND (t, 0));
- if (DECL_DECLARED_CONCEPT_P (var))
- inform (loc, " concept %qE was not satisfied", expr);
+inline void
+diagnose_predicate_constraint (location_t loc, tree orig, tree cur, tree args)
+{
+ if (TREE_CODE (PRED_CONSTR_EXPR (cur)) == TRAIT_EXPR)
+ diagnose_trait_expression (loc, orig, cur, args);
else
- inform (loc, " %qE evaluated to false", expr);
+ diagnose_other_expression (loc, orig, cur, args);
}
-/* Determine if the requires-expression, when normalized as a
- constraint is satisfied by ARGS.
+/* Diagnose a failed pack expansion, possibly containing constraints. */
- TODO: Build sets of expressions, types, and constraints
- based on the requirements in T and emit specific diagnostics
- for those. */
void
-diagnose_requires_expression (location_t loc, tree t, tree args)
+diagnose_pack_expansion (location_t loc, tree, tree cur, tree args)
{
- if (constraint_expression_satisfied_p (t, args))
+ if (constraint_expression_satisfied_p (cur, args))
return;
- inform (loc, "requirements not satisfied");
-}
-
-void
-diagnose_pack_expansion (location_t loc, tree t, tree args)
-{
- if (constraint_expression_satisfied_p (t, args))
+ if (elide_constraint_failure_p())
return;
/* Make sure that we don't have naked packs that we don't expect. */
- if (!same_type_p (TREE_TYPE (t), boolean_type_node))
+ if (!same_type_p (TREE_TYPE (cur), boolean_type_node))
{
- inform (loc, "invalid pack expansion in constraint %qE", t);
+ inform (loc, "invalid pack expansion in constraint %qE", cur);
return;
}
- inform (loc, " in the expansion of %qE", t);
+ inform (loc, "in the expansion of %qE", cur);
/* Get the vector of expanded arguments. Note that n must not
be 0 since this constraint is not satisfied. */
++processing_template_decl;
- tree exprs = tsubst_pack_expansion (t, args, tf_none, NULL_TREE);
+ tree exprs = tsubst_pack_expansion (cur, args, tf_none, NULL_TREE);
--processing_template_decl;
if (exprs == error_mark_node)
{
}
}
-/* Diagnose an expression that would be characterized as
- a predicate constraint. */
+/* Diagnose a potentially unsatisfied concept check constraint DECL<CARGS>.
+ Parameters are as for diagnose_constraint. */
+
void
-diagnose_other_expression (location_t loc, tree t, tree args)
+diagnose_check_constraint (location_t loc, tree orig, tree cur, tree args)
{
- if (constraint_expression_satisfied_p (t, args))
+ if (constraints_satisfied_p (cur, args))
return;
- inform (loc, " %qE evaluated to false", t);
+
+ tree decl = CHECK_CONSTR_CONCEPT (cur);
+ tree cargs = CHECK_CONSTR_ARGS (cur);
+ tree tmpl = DECL_TI_TEMPLATE (decl);
+ tree check = build_nt (CHECK_CONSTR, decl, cargs);
+
+ /* Instantiate the concept check arguments. */
+ tree targs = tsubst (cargs, args, tf_none, NULL_TREE);
+ if (targs == error_mark_node)
+ {
+ if (elide_constraint_failure_p ())
+ return;
+ inform (loc, "invalid use of the concept %qE", check);
+ tsubst (cargs, args, tf_warning_or_error, NULL_TREE);
+ return;
+ }
+
+ tree sub = build_tree_list (tmpl, targs);
+ /* Update to the expanded definitions. */
+ cur = expand_concept (decl, targs);
+ if (cur == error_mark_node)
+ {
+ if (elide_constraint_failure_p ())
+ return;
+ inform (loc, "in the expansion of concept %qE %S", check, sub);
+ cur = get_concept_definition (decl);
+ tsubst_expr (cur, targs, tf_warning_or_error, NULL_TREE, false);
+ return;
+ }
+
+ orig = get_concept_definition (CHECK_CONSTR_CONCEPT (orig));
+ orig = normalize_expression (orig);
+
+ location_t dloc = DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (decl);
+ inform (dloc, "within %qS", sub);
+ diagnose_constraint (dloc, orig, cur, targs);
}
+/* Diagnose a potentially unsatisfied conjunction or disjunction. Parameters
+ are as for diagnose_constraint. */
+
void
-diagnose_expression (location_t loc, tree t, tree args)
+diagnose_logical_constraint (location_t loc, tree orig, tree cur, tree args)
{
- switch (TREE_CODE (t))
- {
- case TRUTH_ANDIF_EXPR:
- diagnose_logical_operation (loc, t, args);
- break;
+ tree t0 = TREE_OPERAND (cur, 0);
+ tree t1 = TREE_OPERAND (cur, 1);
+ if (!constraints_satisfied_p (t0, args))
+ diagnose_constraint (loc, TREE_OPERAND (orig, 0), t0, args);
+ else if (TREE_CODE (orig) == TRUTH_ORIF_EXPR)
+ return;
+ if (!constraints_satisfied_p (t1, args))
+ diagnose_constraint (loc, TREE_OPERAND (orig, 1), t1, args);
+}
- case TRUTH_ORIF_EXPR:
- diagnose_logical_operation (loc, t, args);
- break;
+/* Diagnose a potential expression constraint failure. */
- case CALL_EXPR:
- diagnose_call_expression (loc, t, args);
- break;
+void
+diagnose_expression_constraint (location_t loc, tree orig, tree cur, tree args)
+{
+ if (constraints_satisfied_p (cur, args))
+ return;
+ if (elide_constraint_failure_p())
+ return;
- case TEMPLATE_ID_EXPR:
- diagnose_template_id (loc, t, args);
- break;
+ tree expr = EXPR_CONSTR_EXPR (orig);
+ inform (loc, "the required expression %qE would be ill-formed", expr);
- case REQUIRES_EXPR:
- diagnose_requires_expression (loc, t, args);
- break;
+ // TODO: We should have a flag that controls this substitution.
+ // I'm finding it very useful for resolving concept check errors.
- case TRAIT_EXPR:
- diagnose_trait_expression (loc, t, args);
- break;
+ // inform (input_location, "==== BEGIN DUMP ====");
+ // tsubst_expr (EXPR_CONSTR_EXPR (orig), args, tf_warning_or_error, NULL_TREE, false);
+ // inform (input_location, "==== END DUMP ====");
+}
- case EXPR_PACK_EXPANSION:
- diagnose_pack_expansion (loc, t, args);
- break;
+/* Diagnose a potentially failed type constraint. */
- default:
- diagnose_other_expression (loc, t, args);
- break;
+void
+diagnose_type_constraint (location_t loc, tree orig, tree cur, tree args)
+{
+ if (constraints_satisfied_p (cur, args))
+ return;
+ if (elide_constraint_failure_p())
+ return;
+
+ tree type = TYPE_CONSTR_TYPE (orig);
+ inform (loc, "the required type %qT would be ill-formed", type);
+}
+
+/* Diagnose a potentially unsatisfied conversion constraint. */
+
+void
+diagnose_implicit_conversion_constraint (location_t loc, tree orig, tree cur,
+ tree args)
+{
+ if (constraints_satisfied_p (cur, args))
+ return;
+
+ /* The expression and type will previously have been substituted into,
+ and therefore may already be an error. Also, we will have already
+ diagnosed substitution failures into an expression since this must be
+ part of a compound requirement. */
+ tree expr = ICONV_CONSTR_EXPR (cur);
+ if (error_operand_p (expr))
+ return;
+
+ /* Don't elide a previously diagnosed failure. */
+ if (elide_constraint_failure_p())
+ return;
+
+ tree type = ICONV_CONSTR_TYPE (cur);
+ if (error_operand_p (type))
+ {
+ inform (loc, "substitution into type %qT failed",
+ ICONV_CONSTR_TYPE (orig));
+ return;
}
+
+ inform(loc, "%qE is not implicitly convertible to %qT", expr, type);
}
-inline void
-diagnose_predicate_constraint (location_t loc, tree t, tree args)
+/* Diagnose an argument deduction constraint. */
+
+void
+diagnose_argument_deduction_constraint (location_t loc, tree orig, tree cur,
+ tree args)
+{
+ if (constraints_satisfied_p (cur, args))
+ return;
+
+ /* The expression and type will previously have been substituted into,
+ and therefore may already be an error. Also, we will have already
+ diagnosed substution failures into an expression since this must be
+ part of a compound requirement. */
+ tree expr = DEDUCT_CONSTR_EXPR (cur);
+ if (error_operand_p (expr))
+ return;
+
+ /* Don't elide a previously diagnosed failure. */
+ if (elide_constraint_failure_p ())
+ return;
+
+ tree pattern = DEDUCT_CONSTR_PATTERN (cur);
+ if (error_operand_p (pattern))
+ {
+ inform (loc, "substitution into type %qT failed",
+ DEDUCT_CONSTR_PATTERN (orig));
+ return;
+ }
+
+ inform (loc, "unable to deduce placeholder type %qT from %qE",
+ pattern, expr);
+}
+
+/* Diagnose an exception constraint. */
+
+void
+diagnose_exception_constraint (location_t loc, tree orig, tree cur, tree args)
{
- diagnose_expression (loc, PRED_CONSTR_EXPR (t), args);
+ if (constraints_satisfied_p (cur, args))
+ return;
+ if (elide_constraint_failure_p ())
+ return;
+
+ /* Rebuild a noexcept expression. */
+ tree expr = EXCEPT_CONSTR_EXPR (cur);
+ if (error_operand_p (expr))
+ return;
+
+ inform (loc, "%qE evaluated to false", EXCEPT_CONSTR_EXPR (orig));
}
-inline void
-diagnose_conjunction (location_t loc, tree t, tree args)
+/* Diagnose a potentially unsatisfied parameterized constraint. */
+
+void
+diagnose_parameterized_constraint (location_t loc, tree orig, tree cur,
+ tree args)
{
- diagnose_constraint (loc, TREE_OPERAND (t, 0), args);
- diagnose_constraint (loc, TREE_OPERAND (t, 1), args);
+ if (constraints_satisfied_p (cur, args))
+ return;
+
+ local_specialization_stack stack;
+ tree parms = PARM_CONSTR_PARMS (cur);
+ tree vars = tsubst_constraint_variables (parms, args, tf_warning_or_error,
+ NULL_TREE);
+ if (vars == error_mark_node)
+ {
+ if (elide_constraint_failure_p ())
+ return;
+
+ /* TODO: Check which variable failed and use orig to diagnose
+ that substitution error. */
+ inform (loc, "failed to instantiate constraint variables");
+ return;
+ }
+
+ /* TODO: It would be better write these in a list. */
+ while (vars)
+ {
+ inform (loc, " with %q#D", vars);
+ vars = TREE_CHAIN (vars);
+ }
+ orig = PARM_CONSTR_OPERAND (orig);
+ cur = PARM_CONSTR_OPERAND (cur);
+ return diagnose_constraint (loc, orig, cur, args);
}
-/* Diagnose the constraint T for the given ARGS. This is only
- ever invoked on the associated constraints, so we can
- only have conjunctions of predicate constraints. */
+/* Diagnose the constraint CUR for the given ARGS. This is only ever invoked
+ on the associated constraints, so we can only have conjunctions of
+ predicate constraints. The ORIGinal (dependent) constructs follow
+ the current constraints to enable better diagnostics. Note that ORIG
+ and CUR must be the same kinds of node, except when CUR is an error. */
+
void
-diagnose_constraint (location_t loc, tree t, tree args)
+diagnose_constraint (location_t loc, tree orig, tree cur, tree args)
{
- switch (TREE_CODE (t))
+ switch (TREE_CODE (cur))
{
+ case EXPR_CONSTR:
+ diagnose_expression_constraint (loc, orig, cur, args);
+ break;
+
+ case TYPE_CONSTR:
+ diagnose_type_constraint (loc, orig, cur, args);
+ break;
+
+ case ICONV_CONSTR:
+ diagnose_implicit_conversion_constraint (loc, orig, cur, args);
+ break;
+
+ case DEDUCT_CONSTR:
+ diagnose_argument_deduction_constraint (loc, orig, cur, args);
+ break;
+
+ case EXCEPT_CONSTR:
+ diagnose_exception_constraint (loc, orig, cur, args);
+ break;
+
case CONJ_CONSTR:
- diagnose_conjunction (loc, t, args);
+ case DISJ_CONSTR:
+ diagnose_logical_constraint (loc, orig, cur, args);
break;
case PRED_CONSTR:
- diagnose_predicate_constraint (loc, t, args);
+ diagnose_predicate_constraint (loc, orig, cur, args);
+ break;
+
+ case PARM_CONSTR:
+ diagnose_parameterized_constraint (loc, orig, cur, args);
+ break;
+
+ case CHECK_CONSTR:
+ diagnose_check_constraint (loc, orig, cur, args);
+ break;
+
+ case EXPR_PACK_EXPANSION:
+ diagnose_pack_expansion (loc, orig, cur, args);
+ break;
+
+ case ERROR_MARK:
+ /* TODO: Can we improve the diagnostic with the original? */
+ inform (input_location, "ill-formed constraint");
break;
default:
args = TI_ARGS (ti);
}
- /* Check that the constraints are actually valid. */
- tree ci = get_constraints (decl);
- if (!valid_constraints_p (ci))
- {
- inform (loc, " invalid constraints");
- return;
- }
-
/* Recursively diagnose the associated constraints. */
- diagnose_constraint (loc, CI_ASSOCIATED_CONSTRAINTS (ci), args);
+ tree ci = get_constraints (decl);
+ tree t = CI_ASSOCIATED_CONSTRAINTS (ci);
+ diagnose_constraint (loc, t, t, args);
}
} // namespace
void
diagnose_constraints (location_t loc, tree t, tree args)
{
+ constraint_errors = 0;
+
if (constraint_p (t))
- diagnose_constraint (loc, t, args);
- else
+ diagnose_constraint (loc, t, t, args);
+ else if (DECL_P (t))
diagnose_declaration_constraints (loc, t, args);
+ else
+ gcc_unreachable ();
+
+ /* Note the number of elided failures. */
+ int n = undiagnosed_constraint_failures ();
+ if (n > 0)
+ inform (loc, "... and %d more constraint errors not shown", n);
}
#include "system.h"
#include "coretypes.h"
#include "tm.h"
+#include "timevar.h"
#include "hash-set.h"
#include "machmode.h"
#include "vec.h"
// Helper algorithms
-// Increment iter distance(first, last) times.
-template<typename I1, typename I2, typename I3>
- I1 next_by_distance (I1 iter, I2 first, I3 last)
- {
- for ( ; first != last; ++first, ++iter)
- ;
- return iter;
- }
+template<typename I>
+inline I
+next (I iter)
+{
+ return ++iter;
+}
+
+template<typename I, typename P>
+inline bool
+any_p (I first, I last, P pred)
+{
+ while (first != last)
+ {
+ if (pred(*first))
+ return true;
+ ++first;
+ }
+ return false;
+}
+
+bool prove_implication (tree, tree);
/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proof state
---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
+struct term_entry
+{
+ tree t;
+};
+
+/* Hashing function and equality for constraint entries. */
+
+struct term_hasher : ggc_ptr_hash<term_entry>
+{
+ static hashval_t hash (term_entry *e)
+ {
+ return iterative_hash_template_arg (e->t, 0);
+ }
+
+ static bool equal (term_entry *e1, term_entry *e2)
+ {
+ return cp_tree_equal (e1->t, e2->t);
+ }
+};
+
/* A term list is a list of atomic constraints. It is used
to maintain the lists of assumptions and conclusions in a
proof goal.
Each term list maintains an iterator that refers to the current
term. This can be used by various tactics to support iteration
and stateful manipulation of the list. */
-struct term_list : std::list<tree>
+struct term_list
{
- term_list ();
- term_list (const term_list &x);
- term_list& operator= (const term_list &x);
-
- tree current_term () { return *current; }
- const_tree current_term () const { return *current; }
+ typedef std::list<tree>::iterator iterator;
+ term_list ();
+ term_list (tree);
- void insert (tree t);
- tree erase ();
+ bool includes (tree);
+ iterator insert (iterator, tree);
+ iterator push_back (tree);
+ iterator erase (iterator);
+ iterator replace (iterator, tree);
+ iterator replace (iterator, tree, tree);
- void start ();
- void next ();
- bool done() const;
+ iterator begin() { return seq.begin(); }
+ iterator end() { return seq.end(); }
- iterator current;
+ std::list<tree> seq;
+ hash_table<term_hasher> tab;
};
inline
term_list::term_list ()
- : std::list<tree> (), current (end ())
-{ }
+ : seq(), tab (11)
+{
+}
-inline
-term_list::term_list (const term_list &x)
- : std::list<tree> (x)
- , current (next_by_distance (begin (), x.begin (), x.current))
-{ }
+/* Initialize a term list with an initial term. */
-inline term_list&
-term_list::operator= (const term_list &x)
+inline
+term_list::term_list (tree t)
+ : seq (), tab (11)
{
- std::list<tree>::operator=(x);
- current = next_by_distance (begin (), x.begin (), x.current);
- return *this;
+ push_back (t);
}
-/* Try saving the term T into the list of terms. If
- T is already in the list of terms, then no action is
- performed. Otherwise, insert T before the current
- position, making this term current.
+/* Returns true if T is the in the tree. */
- Note that not inserting terms is an optimization
- that corresponds to the structural rule of
- contraction.
-
- NOTE: With the contraction rule, this data structure
- would be more efficiently represented as an ordered set
- or hash set. */
-void
-term_list::insert (tree t)
+inline bool
+term_list::includes (tree t)
{
- /* Search the current term list. If there is already
- a matching term, do not add the new one. */
- for (iterator i = begin(); i != end(); ++i)
- if (cp_tree_equal (*i, t))
- return;
+ term_entry ent = {t};
+ return tab.find (&ent);
+}
- current = std::list<tree>::insert (current, t);
+/* Append a term to the list. */
+inline term_list::iterator
+term_list::push_back (tree t)
+{
+ return insert (end(), t);
}
-/* Remove the current term from the list, repositioning to
- the term following the removed term. Note that the new
- position could be past the end of the list.
+/* Insert a new (unseen) term T into the list before the proposition
+ indicated by ITER. Returns the iterator to the newly inserted
+ element. */
- The removed term is returned. */
-inline tree
-term_list::erase ()
+term_list::iterator
+term_list::insert (iterator iter, tree t)
{
- tree t = *current;
- current = std::list<tree>::erase (current);
- return t;
+ gcc_assert (!includes (t));
+ iter = seq.insert (iter, t);
+ term_entry ent = {t};
+ term_entry** slot = tab.find_slot (&ent, INSERT);
+ term_entry* ptr = ggc_alloc<term_entry> ();
+ *ptr = ent;
+ *slot = ptr;
+ return iter;
}
-/* Initialize the current term to the first in the list. */
-inline void
-term_list::start ()
+/* Remove an existing term from the list. Returns an iterator referring
+ to the element after the removed term. This may be end(). */
+
+term_list::iterator
+term_list::erase (iterator iter)
{
- current = begin ();
+ gcc_assert (includes (*iter));
+ term_entry ent = {*iter};
+ tab.remove_elt (&ent);
+ iter = seq.erase (iter);
+ return iter;
}
-/* Advance to the next term in the list. */
-inline void
-term_list::next ()
+/* Replace the given term with that specified. If the term has
+ been previously seen, do not insert the term. Returns the
+ first iterator past the current term. */
+
+term_list::iterator
+term_list::replace (iterator iter, tree t)
{
- ++current;
+ iter = erase (iter);
+ if (!includes (t))
+ insert (iter, t);
+ return iter;
}
-/* Returns true when the current position is past the end. */
-inline bool
-term_list::done () const
+
+/* Replace the term at the given position by the supplied T1
+ followed by t2. This is used in certain logical operators to
+ load a list of assumptions or conclusions. */
+
+term_list::iterator
+term_list::replace (iterator iter, tree t1, tree t2)
{
- return current == end ();
+ iter = erase (iter);
+ if (!includes (t1))
+ insert (iter, t1);
+ if (!includes (t2))
+ insert (iter, t2);
+ return iter;
}
-
/* A goal (or subgoal) models a sequent of the form
'A |- C' where A and C are lists of assumptions and
conclusions written as propositions in the constraint
- language (i.e., lists of trees).
-*/
+ language (i.e., lists of trees). */
+
struct proof_goal
{
term_list assumptions;
/* A proof state owns a list of goals and tracks the
current sub-goal. The class also provides facilities
for managing subgoals and constructing term lists. */
+
struct proof_state : std::list<proof_goal>
{
proof_state ();
iterator branch (iterator i);
+ iterator discharge (iterator i);
};
-/* An alias for proof state iterators. */
-typedef proof_state::iterator goal_iterator;
+/* Initialize the state with a single empty goal, and set that goal
+ as the current subgoal. */
-/* Initialize the state with a single empty goal,
- and set that goal as the current subgoal. */
inline
proof_state::proof_state ()
: std::list<proof_goal> (1)
{ }
-/* Branch the current goal by creating a new subgoal,
- returning a reference to // the new object. This does
- not update the current goal. */
+/* Branch the current goal by creating a new subgoal, returning a
+ reference to the new object. This does not update the current goal. */
+
inline proof_state::iterator
proof_state::branch (iterator i)
{
return insert (++i, g);
}
+/* Discharge the current goal, setting it equal to the
+ next non-satisfied goal. */
+
+inline proof_state::iterator
+proof_state::discharge (iterator i)
+{
+ gcc_assert (i != end());
+ return erase (i);
+}
+
+
/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Logical rules
+ Debugging
---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
-/*These functions modify the current state and goal by decomposing
- logical expressions using the logical rules of sequent calculus for
- first order logic.
+// void
+// debug (term_list& ts)
+// {
+// for (term_list::iterator i = ts.begin(); i != ts.end(); ++i)
+// verbatim (" # %E", *i);
+// }
+//
+// void
+// debug (proof_goal& g)
+// {
+// debug (g.assumptions);
+// verbatim (" |-");
+// debug (g.conclusions);
+// }
- Note that in each decomposition rule, the term T has been erased
- from term list before the specific rule is applied. */
+/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ Atomicity of constraints
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
-/* The left logical rule for conjunction adds both operands
- to the current set of constraints. */
-void
-left_conjunction (proof_state &, goal_iterator i, tree t)
+/* Returns true if T is not an atomic constraint. */
+
+bool
+non_atomic_constraint_p (tree t)
{
- gcc_assert (TREE_CODE (t) == CONJ_CONSTR);
+ switch (TREE_CODE (t))
+ {
+ case PRED_CONSTR:
+ case EXPR_CONSTR:
+ case TYPE_CONSTR:
+ case ICONV_CONSTR:
+ case DEDUCT_CONSTR:
+ case EXCEPT_CONSTR:
+ return false;
+ case CHECK_CONSTR:
+ case PARM_CONSTR:
+ case CONJ_CONSTR:
+ case DISJ_CONSTR:
+ return true;
+ default:
+ gcc_unreachable ();
+ }
+}
- /* Insert the operands into the current branch. Note that the
- final order of insertion is left-to-right. */
- term_list &l = i->assumptions;
- l.insert (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1));
- l.insert (TREE_OPERAND (t, 0));
+/* Returns true if any constraints in T are not atomic. */
+
+bool
+any_non_atomic_constraints_p (term_list& t)
+{
+ return any_p (t.begin(), t.end(), non_atomic_constraint_p);
}
-/* The left logical rule for disjunction creates a new goal,
- adding the first operand to the original set of
- constraints and the second operand to the new set
- of constraints. */
-void
-left_disjunction (proof_state &s, goal_iterator i, tree t)
+/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ Proof validations
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
+
+enum proof_result
{
- gcc_assert (TREE_CODE (t) == DISJ_CONSTR);
+ invalid,
+ valid,
+ undecided
+};
+
+proof_result check_term (term_list&, tree);
- /* Branch the current subgoal. */
- goal_iterator j = s.branch (i);
- term_list &l1 = i->assumptions;
- term_list &l2 = j->assumptions;
- /* Insert operands into the different branches. */
- l1.insert (TREE_OPERAND (t, 0));
- l2.insert (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1));
+proof_result
+analyze_atom (term_list& ts, tree t)
+{
+ /* FIXME: Hook into special cases, if any. */
+ /*
+ term_list::iterator iter = ts.begin();
+ term_list::iterator end = ts.end();
+ while (iter != end)
+ {
+ ++iter;
+ }
+ */
+
+ if (non_atomic_constraint_p (t))
+ return undecided;
+ if (any_non_atomic_constraints_p (ts))
+ return undecided;
+ return invalid;
}
-/* The left logical rules for parameterized constraints
- adds its operand to the current goal. The list of
- parameters are effectively discarded. */
-void
-left_parameterized_constraint (proof_state &, goal_iterator i, tree t)
+/* Search for a pack expansion in the list of assumptions that would
+ make this expansion valid. */
+
+proof_result
+analyze_pack (term_list& ts, tree t)
{
- gcc_assert (TREE_CODE (t) == PARM_CONSTR);
- term_list &l = i->assumptions;
- l.insert (PARM_CONSTR_OPERAND (t));
+ tree c1 = normalize_expression (PACK_EXPANSION_PATTERN (t));
+ term_list::iterator iter = ts.begin();
+ term_list::iterator end = ts.end();
+ while (iter != end)
+ {
+ if (TREE_CODE (*iter) == TREE_CODE (t))
+ {
+ tree c2 = normalize_expression (PACK_EXPANSION_PATTERN (*iter));
+ if (prove_implication (c2, c1))
+ return valid;
+ else
+ return invalid;
+ }
+ ++iter;
+ }
+ return invalid;
}
-/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Decomposition
----------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
+/* Search for concept checks in TS that we know subsume T. */
-/* The following algorithms decompose expressions into sets of
- atomic propositions. In terms of the sequent calculus, these
- functions exercise the logical rules only.
+proof_result
+search_known_subsumptions (term_list& ts, tree t)
+{
+ for (term_list::iterator i = ts.begin(); i != ts.end(); ++i)
+ if (TREE_CODE (*i) == CHECK_CONSTR)
+ {
+ if (bool* b = lookup_subsumption_result (*i, t))
+ return *b ? valid : invalid;
+ }
+ return undecided;
+}
- This is equivalent, for the purpose of determining subsumption,
- to rewriting a constraint in disjunctive normal form. It also
- allows the resulting assumptions to be used as declarations
- for the purpose of separate checking. */
+/* Determine if the terms in TS provide sufficient support for proving
+ the proposition T. If any term in TS is a concept check that is known
+ to subsume T, then the proof is valid. Otherwise, we have to expand T
+ and continue searching for support. */
-/* Apply the left logical rules to the proof state. */
-void
-decompose_left_term (proof_state &s, goal_iterator i)
+proof_result
+analyze_check (term_list& ts, tree t)
+{
+ proof_result r = search_known_subsumptions (ts, t);
+ if (r != undecided)
+ return r;
+
+ tree tmpl = CHECK_CONSTR_CONCEPT (t);
+ tree args = CHECK_CONSTR_ARGS (t);
+ tree c = expand_concept (tmpl, args);
+ return check_term (ts, c);
+}
+
+/* Recursively check constraints of the parameterized constraint. */
+
+proof_result
+analyze_parameterized (term_list& ts, tree t)
+{
+ return check_term (ts, PARM_CONSTR_OPERAND (t));
+}
+
+proof_result
+analyze_conjunction (term_list& ts, tree t)
+{
+ proof_result r = check_term (ts, TREE_OPERAND (t, 0));
+ if (r == invalid || r == undecided)
+ return r;
+ return check_term (ts, TREE_OPERAND (t, 1));
+}
+
+proof_result
+analyze_disjunction (term_list& ts, tree t)
+{
+ proof_result r = check_term (ts, TREE_OPERAND (t, 0));
+ if (r == valid)
+ return r;
+ return check_term (ts, TREE_OPERAND (t, 1));
+}
+
+proof_result
+analyze_term (term_list& ts, tree t)
{
- term_list &l = i->assumptions;
- tree t = l.current_term ();
switch (TREE_CODE (t))
{
+ case CHECK_CONSTR:
+ return analyze_check (ts, t);
+
+ case PARM_CONSTR:
+ return analyze_parameterized (ts, t);
+
case CONJ_CONSTR:
- left_conjunction (s, i, l.erase ());
- break;
+ return analyze_conjunction (ts, t);
case DISJ_CONSTR:
- left_disjunction (s, i, l.erase ());
- break;
- case PARM_CONSTR:
- left_parameterized_constraint (s, i, l.erase ());
- break;
+ return analyze_disjunction (ts, t);
+
+ case PRED_CONSTR:
+ case EXPR_CONSTR:
+ case TYPE_CONSTR:
+ case ICONV_CONSTR:
+ case DEDUCT_CONSTR:
+ case EXCEPT_CONSTR:
+ return analyze_atom (ts, t);
+
+ case EXPR_PACK_EXPANSION:
+ return analyze_pack (ts, t);
+
+ case ERROR_MARK:
+ /* Encountering an error anywhere in a constraint invalidates
+ the proof, since the constraint is ill-formed. */
+ return invalid;
default:
- l.next ();
- break;
+ gcc_unreachable ();
}
}
-/* Apply the left logical rules of the sequent calculus
- until the current goal is fully decomposed into atomic
- constraints. */
-void
-decompose_left_goal (proof_state &s, goal_iterator i)
+/* Check if a single term can be proven from a set of assumptions.
+ If the proof is not valid, then it is incomplete when either
+ the given term is non-atomic or any term in the list of assumptions
+ is not-atomic. */
+
+proof_result
+check_term (term_list& ts, tree t)
{
- term_list& l = i->assumptions;
- l.start ();
- while (!l.done ())
- decompose_left_term (s, i);
+ /* Try the easy way; search for an equivalent term. */
+ if (ts.includes (t))
+ return valid;
+
+ /* The hard way; actually consider what the term means. */
+ return analyze_term (ts, t);
}
-/* Apply the left logical rules of the sequent calculus
- until the antecedents are fully decomposed into atomic
- constraints. */
-void
-decompose_left (proof_state& s)
+/* Check to see if any term is proven by the assumptions in the
+ proof goal. The proof is valid if the proof of any term is valid.
+ If validity cannot be determined, but any particular
+ check was undecided, then this goal is undecided. */
+
+proof_result
+check_goal (proof_goal& g)
{
- goal_iterator iter = s.begin ();
- goal_iterator end = s.end ();
- for ( ; iter != end; ++iter)
- decompose_left_goal (s, iter);
+ term_list::iterator iter = g.conclusions.begin ();
+ term_list::iterator end = g.conclusions.end ();
+ bool incomplete = false;
+ while (iter != end)
+ {
+ proof_result r = check_term (g.assumptions, *iter);
+ if (r == valid)
+ return r;
+ if (r == undecided)
+ incomplete = true;
+ ++iter;
+ }
+
+ /* Was the proof complete? */
+ if (incomplete)
+ return undecided;
+ else
+ return invalid;
}
-/* Returns a vector of terms from the term list L. */
-tree
-extract_terms (term_list& l)
+/* Check if the the proof is valid. This is the case when all
+ goals can be discharged. If any goal is invalid, then the
+ entire proof is invalid. Otherwise, the proof is undecided. */
+
+proof_result
+check_proof (proof_state& p)
{
- tree result = make_tree_vec (l.size());
- term_list::iterator iter = l.begin();
- term_list::iterator end = l.end();
- for (int n = 0; iter != end; ++iter, ++n)
- TREE_VEC_ELT (result, n) = *iter;
- return result;
+ proof_state::iterator iter = p.begin();
+ proof_state::iterator end = p.end();
+ while (iter != end)
+ {
+ proof_result r = check_goal (*iter);
+ if (r == invalid)
+ return r;
+ if (r == valid)
+ iter = p.discharge (iter);
+ else
+ ++iter;
+ }
+
+ /* If all goals are discharged, then the proof is valid. */
+ if (p.empty())
+ return valid;
+ else
+ return undecided;
}
-/* Extract the assumptions from the proof state S
- as a vector of vectors of atomic constraints. */
-inline tree
-extract_assumptions (proof_state& s)
+/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ Left logical rules
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
+
+term_list::iterator
+load_check_assumption (term_list& ts, term_list::iterator i)
{
- tree result = make_tree_vec (s.size ());
- goal_iterator iter = s.begin ();
- goal_iterator end = s.end ();
- for (int n = 0; iter != end; ++iter, ++n)
- TREE_VEC_ELT (result, n) = extract_terms (iter->assumptions);
- return result;
+ tree decl = CHECK_CONSTR_CONCEPT (*i);
+ tree tmpl = DECL_TI_TEMPLATE (decl);
+ tree args = CHECK_CONSTR_ARGS (*i);
+ return ts.replace(i, expand_concept (tmpl, args));
}
-} // namespace
+term_list::iterator
+load_parameterized_assumption (term_list& ts, term_list::iterator i)
+{
+ return ts.replace(i, PARM_CONSTR_OPERAND(*i));
+}
-/* Decompose the required expression T into a constraint set: a
- vector of vectors containing only atomic propositions. If T is
- invalid, return an error. */
-tree
-decompose_assumptions (tree t)
+term_list::iterator
+load_conjunction_assumption (term_list& ts, term_list::iterator i)
{
- if (!t || t == error_mark_node)
- return t;
+ tree t1 = TREE_OPERAND (*i, 0);
+ tree t2 = TREE_OPERAND (*i, 1);
+ return ts.replace(i, t1, t2);
+}
- /* Create a proof state, and insert T as the sole assumption. */
- proof_state s;
- term_list &l = s.begin ()->assumptions;
- l.insert (t);
+/* Examine the terms in the list, and apply left-logical rules to move
+ terms into the set of assumptions. */
- /* Decompose the expression into a constraint set, and then
- extract the terms for the AST. */
- decompose_left (s);
- return extract_assumptions (s);
+void
+load_assumptions (proof_goal& g)
+{
+ term_list::iterator iter = g.assumptions.begin();
+ term_list::iterator end = g.assumptions.end();
+ while (iter != end)
+ {
+ switch (TREE_CODE (*iter))
+ {
+ case CHECK_CONSTR:
+ iter = load_check_assumption (g.assumptions, iter);
+ break;
+ case PARM_CONSTR:
+ iter = load_parameterized_assumption (g.assumptions, iter);
+ break;
+ case CONJ_CONSTR:
+ iter = load_conjunction_assumption (g.assumptions, iter);
+ break;
+ default:
+ ++iter;
+ break;
+ }
+ }
}
+/* In each subgoal, load constraints into the assumption set. */
-/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Subsumption Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
+void
+load_assumptions(proof_state& p)
+{
+ proof_state::iterator iter = p.begin();
+ while (iter != p.end())
+ {
+ load_assumptions (*iter);
+ ++iter;
+ }
+}
-namespace {
+void
+explode_disjunction (proof_state& p, proof_state::iterator gi, term_list::iterator ti1)
+{
+ tree t1 = TREE_OPERAND (*ti1, 0);
+ tree t2 = TREE_OPERAND (*ti1, 1);
-bool subsumes_constraint (tree, tree);
-bool subsumes_conjunction (tree, tree);
-bool subsumes_disjunction (tree, tree);
-bool subsumes_parameterized_constraint (tree, tree);
-bool subsumes_atomic_constraint (tree, tree);
+ /* Erase the current term from the goal. */
+ proof_goal& g1 = *gi;
+ proof_goal& g2 = *p.branch (gi);
-/* Returns true if the assumption A matches the conclusion C. This
- is generally the case when A and C have the same syntax.
+ /* Get an iterator to the equivalent position in th enew goal. */
+ int n = std::distance (g1.assumptions.begin (), ti1);
+ term_list::iterator ti2 = g2.assumptions.begin ();
+ std::advance (ti2, n);
- NOTE: There will be specialized matching rules to accommodate
- type equivalence, conversion, inheritance, etc. But this is not
- in the current concepts draft. */
-inline bool
-match_terms (tree a, tree c)
-{
- return cp_tree_equal (a, c);
+ /* Replace the disjunction in both branches. */
+ g1.assumptions.replace (ti1, t1);
+ g2.assumptions.replace (ti2, t2);
}
-/* Returns true if the list of assumptions AS subsumes the atomic
- proposition C. This is the case when we can find a proposition
- in AS that entails the conclusion C. */
+
+/* Search the assumptions of the goal for the first disjunction. */
+
bool
-subsumes_atomic_constraint (tree as, tree c)
+explode_goal (proof_state& p, proof_state::iterator gi)
{
- for (int i = 0; i < TREE_VEC_LENGTH (as); ++i)
- if (match_terms (TREE_VEC_ELT (as, i), c))
- return true;
+ term_list& ts = gi->assumptions;
+ term_list::iterator ti = ts.begin();
+ term_list::iterator end = ts.end();
+ while (ti != end)
+ {
+ if (TREE_CODE (*ti) == DISJ_CONSTR)
+ {
+ explode_disjunction (p, gi, ti);
+ return true;
+ }
+ else ++ti;
+ }
return false;
}
-/* Returns true when both operands of C are subsumed by the
- assumptions AS. */
-inline bool
-subsumes_conjunction (tree as, tree c)
+/* Search for the first goal with a disjunction, and then branch
+ creating a clone of that subgoal. */
+
+void
+explode_assumptions (proof_state& p)
{
- tree l = TREE_OPERAND (c, 0);
- tree r = TREE_OPERAND (c, 1);
- return subsumes_constraint (as, l) && subsumes_constraint (as, r);
+ proof_state::iterator iter = p.begin();
+ proof_state::iterator end = p.end();
+ while (iter != end)
+ {
+ if (explode_goal (p, iter))
+ return;
+ ++iter;
+ }
}
-/* Returns true when either operand of C is subsumed by the
- assumptions AS. */
-inline bool
-subsumes_disjunction (tree as, tree c)
+
+/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ Right logical rules
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
+
+term_list::iterator
+load_disjunction_conclusion (term_list& g, term_list::iterator i)
{
- tree l = TREE_OPERAND (c, 0);
- tree r = TREE_OPERAND (c, 1);
- return subsumes_constraint (as, l) || subsumes_constraint (as, r);
+ tree t1 = TREE_OPERAND (*i, 0);
+ tree t2 = TREE_OPERAND (*i, 1);
+ return g.replace(i, t1, t2);
}
-/* Returns true when the operand of C is subsumed by the
- assumptions in AS. The parameters are not considered in
- the subsumption rules. */
-bool
-subsumes_parameterized_constraint (tree as, tree c)
+/* Apply logical rules to the right hand side. This will load the
+ conclusion set with all tpp-level disjunctions. */
+
+void
+load_conclusions (proof_goal& g)
{
- tree t = PARM_CONSTR_OPERAND (c);
- return subsumes_constraint (as, t);
+ term_list::iterator iter = g.conclusions.begin();
+ term_list::iterator end = g.conclusions.end();
+ while (iter != end)
+ {
+ if (TREE_CODE (*iter) == DISJ_CONSTR)
+ iter = load_disjunction_conclusion (g.conclusions, iter);
+ else
+ ++iter;
+ }
}
+void
+load_conclusions (proof_state& p)
+{
+ proof_state::iterator iter = p.begin();
+ while (iter != p.end())
+ {
+ load_conclusions (*iter);
+ ++iter;
+ }
+}
+
+
+/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ High-level proof tactics
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
+
+/* Given two constraints A and C, try to derive a proof that
+ A implies C. */
-/* Returns true when the list of assumptions AS subsumes the
- concluded proposition C. This is a simple recursive descent
- on C, matching against propositions in the assumption list AS. */
bool
-subsumes_constraint (tree as, tree c)
+prove_implication (tree a, tree c)
{
- switch (TREE_CODE (c))
+ /* Quick accept. */
+ if (cp_tree_equal (a, c))
+ return true;
+
+ /* Build the initial proof state. */
+ proof_state proof;
+ proof_goal& goal = proof.front();
+ goal.assumptions.push_back(a);
+ goal.conclusions.push_back(c);
+
+ /* Perform an initial right-expansion in the off-chance that the right
+ hand side contains disjunctions. */
+ load_conclusions (proof);
+
+ int step_max = 1 << 10;
+ int step_count = 0; /* FIXME: We shouldn't have this. */
+ std::size_t branch_limit = 1024; /* FIXME: This needs to be configurable. */
+ while (step_count < step_max && proof.size() < branch_limit)
{
- case CONJ_CONSTR:
- return subsumes_conjunction (as, c);
- case DISJ_CONSTR:
- return subsumes_disjunction (as, c);
- case PARM_CONSTR:
- return subsumes_parameterized_constraint (as, c);
- default:
- return subsumes_atomic_constraint (as, c);
+ /* Determine if we can prove that the assumptions entail the
+ conclusions. If so, we're done. */
+ load_assumptions (proof);
+
+ /* Can we solve the proof based on this? */
+ proof_result r = check_proof (proof);
+ if (r != undecided)
+ return r == valid;
+
+ /* If not, then we need to dig into disjunctions. */
+ explode_assumptions (proof);
+
+ ++step_count;
}
+
+ if (step_count == step_max)
+ error ("subsumption failed to resolve");
+
+ if (proof.size() == branch_limit)
+ error ("exceeded maximum number of branches");
+
+ return false;
}
-/* Returns true if the LEFT constraints subsume the RIGHT constraints.
- This is done by checking that the RIGHT requirements follow from
- each of the LEFT subgoals. */
+/* Returns true if the LEFT constraint subsume the RIGHT constraints.
+ This is done by deriving a proof of the conclusions on the RIGHT
+ from the assumptions on the LEFT assumptions. */
+
bool
subsumes_constraints_nonnull (tree left, tree right)
{
gcc_assert (check_constraint_info (left));
gcc_assert (check_constraint_info (right));
- /* Check that the required expression in RIGHT is subsumed by each
- subgoal in the assumptions of LEFT. */
- tree as = CI_ASSUMPTIONS (left);
- tree c = CI_NORMALIZED_CONSTRAINTS (right);
- for (int i = 0; i < TREE_VEC_LENGTH (as); ++i)
- if (!subsumes_constraint (TREE_VEC_ELT (as, i), c))
- return false;
- return true;
+ auto_timevar time (TV_CONSTRAINT_SUB);
+ tree a = CI_ASSOCIATED_CONSTRAINTS (left);
+ tree c = CI_ASSOCIATED_CONSTRAINTS (right);
+ return prove_implication (a, c);
}
} /* namespace */
/* Returns true if the LEFT constraints subsume the RIGHT
- constraints. */
+ constraints. */
+
bool
subsumes (tree left, tree right)
{
projects / gcc.git / commitdiff