Untagged variants: no warning for patterns shadowed by a literal case, and a spurious non-exhaustive warning for bool payloads
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.
Valutazione
- Difficoltà
- 5/5
- Tempo stimato
- Più di una settimana
- Idoneità per principianti
- 35/100
- Tipo di issue
- Bug
- Chiarezza
- Specificata chiaramente
- Stato di attività
- Attiva
- Stack tecnologico
- ocaml
- Ambito
- compilers
Direzione di ricerca
Start by reading parmatch.ml, which the issue identifies as the site of the exhaustiveness check, and find the adjacent unused-case check for the warning proposal. Review the related issues #8631, #8632, and #8777 for runtime value comparisons and overlap cases. Done means dead untagged payload patterns are warned about and the bool example is exhaustive without an unreachable failure.
Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.
Descrizione
Summary
An untagged variant may have a literal case whose runtime value a payload case can also hold (#8632, #8777):
@unboxed type t = | @as("a") A | S(string)
Matching tests declared literals first, so the pattern S("a") can never match. The value "a" always goes to A, or to a wildcard if there is no A arm. The type checker treats S("a") and A as different, which causes two problems.
1. No warning for patterns that can never match
Checked on master. None of these produce a warning, and each S(...) arm marked dead is dead in the generated JS:
let f1 = x => switch x { | A => 1 | S("a") => 2 | S(_) => 3 } // S("a") dead
let f2 = x => switch x { | S("a") => 2 | A => 1 | S(_) => 3 } // dead even as first arm
let f3 = x => switch x { | S("a") => 2 | _ => 3 } // compiles to `return 3`
let f4 = x => switch x { | S("a" | "b") => 2 | _ => 3 } // the "a" alternative is dead
The same applies when:
- the literal comes from the constructor name (
Primary | Color(string):Color("Primary")is dead); - an int literal overlaps a float payload (
@as(1) One | F(float):F(1.0)is dead); - a nested untagged constant has the same value (
@as("x") X | W(inner)whereinnerhas@as("x") P:W(P)is dead).
In a refutable binding such as let l = (S("a") as v) => v, the pattern never matches at all, so every call with S("a") throws Match_failure.
Proposal: warn on a constructor pattern S(p) of an untagged variant when every value p can match is the runtime value of a literal case in the same variant. Use warning 11 (unused case) for a whole arm and warning 12 (redundant sub-pattern) for or-pattern alternatives. Suggested message: "this pattern can never match: "a" is the value of constructor A".
Notes:
- The check is local to each pattern and doesn't depend on arm order, so it can run beside
check_unusedwithout touching the exhaustiveness algorithm. - Values must be compared the way they are at runtime, as in #8631:
1and1.0are equal, bigint spellings differ (1_0n=10n), ints use their 32-bit value, and a constructor without@asis represented by its own name. - Guards (
S(s) if s == "a") are out of scope.
2. Spurious non-exhaustive warning for bool payloads
With #8777 a bool payload can partly overlap a literal:
@unboxed type b = | @as(true) Yes | Ans(bool)
let g = x => switch x { | Yes => 1 | Ans(false) => 2 }
This match covers every value, yet the compiler reports warning 8 with the counterexample Ans(true) and emits an unreachable Match_failure throw. The only way to silence it is to add the dead arm Ans(true) => ..., which point 1 would then flag. The two parts therefore need to land together, or the bool case ends up with no warning-free way to write the match.
Proposal: during the exhaustiveness check only, treat a literal-case pattern as also covering the payload values equal to it, e.g. check Yes as Yes | Ans(true). This is harder than point 1 because it changes parmatch.ml. For string and number payloads it rarely matters, since their domain is infinite, but for bool it does.
Related: #8632, #8777, #8631, rescript-lang/rescript-lang.org#1337
- Lingua principale
- OCaml
- Stelle
- 7.5k
- Fork
- 484
- Merge medio
- 20h 27m
- PR unite (30g)
- 120
Preparare l'ambiente
Avvia il container di sviluppo del progetto nel browser, con il tuo account GitHub.
- Nessun Dockerfile né file Docker Compose
- Nessun modello di pull request
- Leggi la guida per i contributori
Come iniziare
- Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
- Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
- Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
- Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.
Altre issue di rescript-lang/rescript
-
Difficoltà 5/5 Più di una settimana Idoneità per principianti 25/100
rescript-lang/rescript#8833 · 1 reazione ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
rewatch watch on Linux stops watching a source folder when an overlapping recursive source folder is removed from rescript.jsonForse già presa @cknitt l’ha presa 1 giorno fa. Aperta
Difficoltà 4/5 1-2 giorni Idoneità per principianti 35/100
rescript-lang/rescript#8825 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
Difficoltà 5/5 Più di una settimana Idoneità per principianti 35/100
rescript-lang/rescript#8798 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
Difficoltà 3/5 Mezza giornata Idoneità per principianti 58/100
rescript-lang/rescript#8757 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
Difficoltà 3/5 1-2 giorni Idoneità per principianti 40/100
rescript-lang/rescript#8753 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
Tutte le issue di rescript-lang/rescript
Issue simili
-
llvm.memcpy with destination align but no source align asserts "Missed Source alignment!"Forse già presa @pvelesko l’ha presa oggi. Aperta
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 72/100
KhronosGroup/SPIRV-LLVM-Translator#4093 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 2 giorni
-
UB: (int) cast of a user double outside int range in dispatch / vm_index_is_int / flat_index_atApertaarea:runtime-vm
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 72/100
InauguralSystems/EigenScript#1748 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
bug
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 76/100
leanprover/lean4#15677 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 72/100
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 2 giorni
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 75/100
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno