Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Check type of self in static dispatch #8867

Merged
merged 39 commits into from
Feb 14, 2024

Conversation

radeusgd
Copy link
Member

@radeusgd radeusgd commented Jan 25, 2024

Pull Request Description

Important Notes

Checklist

Please ensure that the following checklist has been satisfied before submitting the PR:

  • The documentation has been updated, if necessary.
  • Screenshots/screencasts have been attached, if there are any visual changes. For interactive or animated visual changes, a screencast is preferred.
  • All code follows the
    Scala,
    Java,
    and
    Rust
    style guides. In case you are using a language not listed above, follow the Rust style guide.
  • All code has been tested:
    • Unit tests have been written where possible.
    • Enable *BinaryDispatchTest.staticWithRFirst* tests
    • If GUI codebase was changed, the GUI was tested when built using ./run ide build.

|""".stripMargin
eval(code)
consumeOut should contain(
" at <enso> <default::Test.fn::y>(Test:7:10-35)"
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The reported location checked by this test used to be:

-        at <enso> <default::Test.fn::Name.Literal(name = y, isMethod = false, location = Some(IdentifiedLocation[location=Location[start=89, end=90], uuid=None]), passData = MetadataStorage[], diagnostics = DiagnosticStorage(diagnostics = List()), id = null)>(Internal)
+        at <enso> <default::Test.fn::y>(Test:7:10-35)
  1. the name was wrongly too long displaying IR internals
  2. the location was Internal as it was not set correctly

Comment on lines 615 to 662
@Test
public void selfTypeConversion() throws Exception {
final URI uri = new URI("memory://self_type_conversion.enso");
final Source src =
Source.newBuilder(
"enso",
"""
from Standard.Base import all
type My_Type
Value x
f self y = self.x+y

type Convertible_Type
A x

type Inconvertible_Type
B x

My_Type.from (that : Convertible_Type) = My_Type.Value that.x+1

static_convertible = My_Type.f (Convertible_Type.A 23) 1000
static_inconvertible = My_Type.f (Inconvertible_Type.B 23) 1000
""",
uri.getAuthority())
.uri(uri)
.buildLiteral();

var module = ctx.eval(src);
var convertible = module.invokeMember(MethodNames.Module.EVAL_EXPRESSION, "static_convertible");
assertEquals(1024, convertible.asInt());

try {
var invalid_static_call =
module.invokeMember(MethodNames.Module.EVAL_EXPRESSION, "static_inconvertible");
fail("Expecting an exception, not: " + invalid_static_call);
} catch (PolyglotException e) {
assertTypeError("`self`", "My_Type", "Inconvertible_Type", e.getMessage());
}
}
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This test also ensures that not only values of requested type but also values convertible to it are supported, if they go through the conversion.


var module = ctx.eval(src);
var convertible = module.invokeMember(MethodNames.Module.EVAL_EXPRESSION, "static_convertible");
assertEquals(1024, convertible.asInt());
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We see that the value is 1024 not 1023, meaning that the conversion has been applied.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Probably better to turn this note into assertEquals("messgage", ...) message.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ok, will do

Copy link
Member

@JaroslavTulach JaroslavTulach left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Tests seems to correctly request the desired behavior. The implementation is at surprising (to me) place, but it works and that's what counts.

module.invokeMember(MethodNames.Module.EVAL_EXPRESSION, "invalid_static_call");
fail("Expecting an exception, not: " + invalid_static_call);
} catch (PolyglotException e) {
assertTypeError("`self`", "My_Type", "Other_Type", e.getMessage());
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

OK, the test looks fine.


var module = ctx.eval(src);
var convertible = module.invokeMember(MethodNames.Module.EVAL_EXPRESSION, "static_convertible");
assertEquals(1024, convertible.asInt());
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Probably better to turn this note into assertEquals("messgage", ...) message.

_,
_
)) :: rest =>
selfArg.copy(ascribedType = Some(typ)) :: rest
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I was expecting fix in the IrToTruffle rather than in the IR passes. Probably because I am more comfortable with the Truffle nodes than the IR...

@JaroslavTulach
Copy link
Member

JaroslavTulach commented Jan 26, 2024

@radeusgd, you will need to stop delegating from Array to Vector methods statically: https://github.com/enso-org/enso/actions/runs/7660354279/job/20877478960?pr=8867#step:10:2883 and move the shared static implementations to ArrayLikeHelpers.enso.

However that's all good - it demonstrates your check really detects violations!

GitHub
Hybrid visual and textual functional programming. Contribute to enso-org/enso development by creating an account on GitHub.

@radeusgd
Copy link
Member Author

@radeusgd, you will need to stop delegating from Array to Vector methods statically: enso-org/enso/actions/runs/7660354279/job/20877478960?pr=8867#step:10:2883 and move the shared static implementations to ArrayLikeHelpers.enso.

However that's all good - it demonstrates your check really detects violations!

GitHub**Check type of self in static dispatch · enso-org/enso@6760aed**Hybrid visual and textual functional programming. Contribute to enso-org/enso development by creating an account on GitHub.

oh, right, I completely forgot about it! Of course, so I will need to do a slight refactor to make this work. I will see to it when I have a moment.

@JaroslavTulach
Copy link
Member

Once you merge with develop, please enable:

[info] Test org.enso.interpreter.test.BinaryDispatchTest.staticWithRFirstArgumentIsConverted ignored
[info] Test org.enso.interpreter.test.BinaryDispatchTest.staticWithRFirstAndZSecondNoConversionHappens ignored

@enso-bot enso-bot bot mentioned this pull request Jan 31, 2024
6 tasks
@radeusgd
Copy link
Member Author

radeusgd commented Feb 5, 2024

Once you merge with develop, please enable:

[info] Test org.enso.interpreter.test.BinaryDispatchTest.staticWithRFirstArgumentIsConverted ignored
[info] Test org.enso.interpreter.test.BinaryDispatchTest.staticWithRFirstAndZSecondNoConversionHappens ignored

I enabled them and they seem to be passing 🙂

@radeusgd
Copy link
Member Author

radeusgd commented Feb 7, 2024

Benchmarks trial 1
https://github.com/enso-org/enso/actions/runs/7818863156
https://github.com/enso-org/enso/actions/runs/7818865699

GitHub
Hybrid visual and textual functional programming. Contribute to enso-org/enso development by creating an account on GitHub.
GitHub
Hybrid visual and textual functional programming. Contribute to enso-org/enso development by creating an account on GitHub.

@radeusgd
Copy link
Member Author

radeusgd commented Feb 9, 2024

Stdlib Run after fixing remaining warning tests: https://github.com/enso-org/enso/actions/runs/7841630104

And one after changing to the simpler approach suggested by @jdunkerley (instead of extracting common vector/array logic, we just use the Vector methods by converting array by Vector.from_polyglot_array (O(1))), and some cleanups that should not influence benchmarks (just small compiler code refactor): https://github.com/enso-org/enso/actions/runs/7842961320

I was unable to run engine benchmarks as these have been failing for a while, I imagine it would be best to try checking these as well before merging this PR...

# Conflicts:
#	distribution/lib/Standard/Base/0.0.0-dev/src/Data/Array.enso
@radeusgd radeusgd mentioned this pull request Feb 10, 2024
5 tasks
@radeusgd
Copy link
Member Author

@JaroslavTulach I re-requested your review as I have added some additional changes and thought you may want to see them.

My initial solution was a bit of a hack apparently - I assumed the type I define methods on is always in scope so I can just refer to that type by its regular name. The test https://github.com/enso-org/enso/blob/wip/radeusgd/8805-self-type-check/test/Base_Tests/src/Semantic/Names_Spec.enso#L8-L12 showed me that we may define methods on a name that is not in the current scope - by extension methods on a type accessed by a (not-necessarily-fully) qualified name.

I then tried just using fully qualified names for that - but that failed due to a bug #8997.

Towards the Self Type

As I did not see a very immediate solution, instead I relied on the Self type. The concept was partially to introduced to Enso - we have IR for it although I think it is not fully supported in the parser yet, e.g. even with these changes, the following program:

type My_Type
    Value x y

    swap : Self
    swap self -> Self = Self.Value self.y self.x

main =
    (My_Type.Value 1 2).swap

still fails with

X:\NBO\repr\test4.enso:4:12: error: The name `Self` could not be found.
    4 |     swap : Self
      |            ^~~~
X:\NBO\repr\test4.enso:5:18: error: The name `Self` could not be found.
    5 |     swap self -> Self = Self.Value self.y self.x
      |                  ^~~~
Aborting due to 2 errors and 0 warnings.
Execution finished with an error: Compilation aborted due to errors.

I did not aspire to implement the full scope of the Self type in this PR, as that far exceeded the scope of this PR and is not of immediate use anyway.

Instead, I added as much of self type resolution as was needed to get the type checks working.
Most of it happens in the TypeNames pass: https://github.com/enso-org/enso/blob/wip/radeusgd/8805-self-type-check/engine/runtime-compiler/src/main/scala/org/enso/compiler/pass/resolve/TypeNames.scala#L83-L120

Now, I am able to annotate the self argument in methods with the Name.Self IR which is resolved to the 'current' type and thus checked exactly in the way that we want.

Refactoring Array

My first approach was as we discussed - I've split the logic of vector operations into Array_Like_Helpers (that do not have any type ascriptions so they don't check the types) and made both Array and Vector delegate to these.

Later, James suggested that a simpler solution may be possible and so I've tried it b40b5ef - I'm converting the array (O(1) op) into a Vector and then passing it to the vector operations in the same way as before - but thanks to the conversion the operation now satisfies the type check.

I guess I could even try to avoid the static call convention altogether and just call the method on the converted vector... I will try that.

I'm not sure if I remember the rationale for that (@jdunkerley please correct me if I quote you wrongly), but I think it was to simplify the traces for Vector operations which are most common and could be a pain with debugging.

Benchmarking

I wanted to see if there's any performance impact.

I ran benchmarks both with the Array_Like_Helpers version (run 7841630104) and the to-vector-conversion (run 7842961320).

I could not yet run engine benchmarks as they are currently broken. Hopefully to be fixed by #8975. I guess I'd try to run the benchmarks again once that PR is merged.

Still, without #7927 it is relatively hard to be able to compare the benchmarks - apart from clear outliers, often it is hard to say if the difference is significant or just a random deviation within the usual variance.

Looking as much as I could at the results, it seems that the results fit in the usual benchmark variance, with either of the array-like-helper or vector-conversion approaches sometime being faster and sometime slower - no clear winners here.

… gets rid of the not-really-necessary self type check in that case
@radeusgd
Copy link
Member Author

radeusgd commented Feb 10, 2024

I guess I could even try to avoid the static call convention altogether and just call the method on the converted vector... I will try that.

Done in 28a4e34.
Another benchmark scheduled at https://github.com/enso-org/enso/actions/runs/7857761166

GitHub
Hybrid visual and textual functional programming. Contribute to enso-org/enso development by creating an account on GitHub.

Copy link
Member

@JaroslavTulach JaroslavTulach left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't like the from_polyglot_array wrapping. If engine benchmarks are OK, then maybe... but the right fix was supposed to be to move the implementations into Array_Like_Helpers.

rationale ... was to simplify the traces for Vector operations

I see. I still continue to like Array_Like_Helpers solution more.

@@ -159,7 +159,7 @@ type Array
If a `Range`, the selection is specified by two indices, from and to.
@range Index_Sub_Range.default_widget
take : (Index_Sub_Range | Range | Integer) -> Vector Any
take self range=(Index_Sub_Range.First 1) = Vector.take self range
take self range=(Index_Sub_Range.First 1) = (Vector.from_polyglot_array self).take range
Copy link
Member

@JaroslavTulach JaroslavTulach Feb 12, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What's the effect of Vector.from_polyglot_array wrapping on engine benchmarks? I am afraid some of them might slow down.

Wrapping all Array objects by from_polyglot_array isn't the expected fix. I was expecting all the static methods to move into Array_Like_Helpers and both the Array and Vector instance methods to delegate to the Array_Like_Helpers implementations.

Array_Like_Helpers solution would directly operate on the vector/array. Wrapping by from_polyglot_array creates a proxy object in memory. All the code accessing it needs to unwrap the original object and then perform the original operation. E.g. we allocate more memory on heap, we need bigger Truffle ASTs (not that we'd measure any such aspect) than Array_Like_Helpers solution would require.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I did implement the Array_Like_Helpers solution in the first place, but @jdunkerley suggested the wrapping one might be better.

If we decide to go back to Array_Like_Helpers, it's just the matter of reverting the commit a8171168789d7252478cc334d82b2e29e51ee024

I guess either way we should wait for the fix of engine benchmarks and see how both solutions compare there.

I'm happy to go for either of these.

@JaroslavTulach
Copy link
Member

JaroslavTulach commented Feb 12, 2024

I ran benchmarks both with the Array_Like_Helpers version (run 7841630104) and the to-vector-conversion (run 7842961320).

Those are StdLib benchmarks, not engine benchmarks! We need to compare the engine benchmarks (which are currently broken, being addressed by @Akirathan as part of his #8975). The engine benchmarks contain microbenchmarks comparing various array-like implementations. They will tell us if the from_polyglot_proxy implementation is fast or not.

@Akirathan
Copy link
Member

Fix of the engine benchmarks is tracked in #9026 with the highest priority.

@radeusgd
Copy link
Member Author

I ran benchmarks both with the Array_Like_Helpers version (run 7841630104) and the to-vector-conversion (run 7842961320).

Those are StdLib benchmarks, not engine benchmarks! We need to compare the engine benchmarks (which are currently broken, being addressed by @Akirathan as part of his #8975). The engine benchmarks contain microbenchmarks comparing various array-like implementations. They will tell us if the from_polyglot_proxy implementation is fast or not.

As noted below, I ran what I was able to run, but yes I also want to see the engine benchmarks comparison once they are fixed.

@radeusgd
Copy link
Member Author

radeusgd commented Feb 13, 2024

(Engine) benchmark run on current branch state: https://github.com/enso-org/enso/actions/runs/7886066367

Run after reverting the Array_Like_Helpers approach: https://github.com/enso-org/enso/actions/runs/7887354689

@JaroslavTulach JaroslavTulach self-requested a review February 13, 2024 14:17
Copy link
Member

@JaroslavTulach JaroslavTulach left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've just checked the benchmarks and I see no slowdown. I still maintain slight preference in favor of Array_Like_Helpers approach, but approving even the proxy way.

@radeusgd radeusgd added the CI: Ready to merge This PR is eligible for automatic merge label Feb 14, 2024
@mergify mergify bot merged commit d45f0fe into develop Feb 14, 2024
30 of 31 checks passed
@mergify mergify bot deleted the wip/radeusgd/8805-self-type-check branch February 14, 2024 15:50
@radeusgd radeusgd mentioned this pull request Feb 22, 2024
3 tasks
@enso-bot enso-bot bot mentioned this pull request Mar 1, 2024
6 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CI: Ready to merge This PR is eligible for automatic merge
Projects
None yet
5 participants