Commit Graph

6 Commits (98fcb115da07e3e7b63dbecc67e0a826f656d12d)

Author SHA1 Message Date
Mike Gerwitz 7f3ce44481 tamer: asg::graph: Formalize dynamic relationships (edges)
The `TreePreOrderDfs` iterator needed to expose additional edge context to
the caller (specifically, the `Span`).  This was getting a bit messy, so
this consolodates everything into a new `DynObjectRel`, which also
emphasizes that it is in need of narrowing.

Packing everything up like that also allows us to return more information to
the caller without complicating the API, since the caller does not need to
be concerned with all of those values individually.

Depth is kept separate, since that is a property of the traversal and is not
stored on the graph.  (Rather, it _is_ a property of the graph, but it's not
calculated until traversal.  But, depth will also vary for a given node
because of cross edges, and so we cannot store any concrete depth on the
graph for a given node.  Not even a canonical one, because once we start
doing inlining and common subexpression elimination, there will be shared
edges that are _not_ cross edges (the node is conceptually part of _both_
trees).  Okay, enough of this rambling parenthetical.)

DEV-13708
2023-03-10 14:27:57 -05:00
Mike Gerwitz 4afc8c22e6 tamer: asg::air: Merge Pkg closing span
The `Pkg` span will now properly reflect the entire definition of the
package including the opening and closing tags.

This was found while I was working on a graph traversal.

DEV-13597
2023-03-10 14:27:57 -05:00
Mike Gerwitz 89700aa949 tamer: asg::graph::object::ObjectRel::is_cross_edge: New trait method
This introduces the concept of ontological cross edges.

The term "cross edge" is most often seen in the context of graph traversals,
e.g. the trees formed by a depth-first search.  This, however, refers to the
trees that are inherent in the ontology of the graph.

For example, an `ExprRef` will produce a cross edge to the referenced
`Ident`, that that is a different tree than the current expression.  (Well,
I suppose technically it _could_ be a back edge, but then that'd be a cycle
which would fail the process once we get to preventing it.  So let's ignore
that for now.)

DEV-13708
2023-03-10 14:27:57 -05:00
Mike Gerwitz 2d3b27ac01 tamer: asg: Root package definition
This causes a package definition to be rooted (so that it can be easily
accessed for a graph walk).  This keeps consistent with the new
`ObjectIndex`-based API by introducing a unit `Root` `ObjectKind` and the
boilerplate that goes with it.

This boilerplate, now glaringly obvious, will be refactored at some point,
since its repetition is onerous and distracting.

DEV-13159
2023-02-01 10:34:17 -05:00
Mike Gerwitz f753a23bad tamer: asg: Introduce edge from Package to Ident
Included in this diff are the corresponding changes to the graph to support
the change.  Adding the edge was easy, but we also need a way to get the
package for an identifier.  The easiest way to do that is to modify the edge
weight to include not just the target node type, but also the source.

DEV-13159
2023-02-01 10:34:17 -05:00
Mike Gerwitz 39d093525c tamer: nir, asg: Introduce package to ASG
This does not yet create edges from identifiers to the package; just getting
this introduced was quite a bit of work, so I want to get this committed.

Note that this also includes a change to NIR so that `Close` contains the
entity so that we can pattern-match for AIR transformations rather than
retaining yet another stack with checks that are already going to be done by
AIR.  This makes NIR stand less on its own from a self-validation point, but
that's okay, given that it's the language that the user entered and,
conceptually, they could enter invalid NIR the same as they enter invalid
XML (e.g. from a REPL).

In _practice_, of course, NIR is lowered from XML and the schema is enforced
during that lowering and so the validation does exist as part of that
parsing.

These concessions speak more to the verbosity of the language (Rust) than
anything.

DEV-13159
2023-02-01 10:34:16 -05:00