bool runOnFunction(Function &F) override {
outs() << "Inside Function: "<<F.getName()<<"\n";
int i = 0;
map<int, Instruction*> work;
for(BasicBlock &BB : F)
for(Instruction &I : BB){
if(i == 15)
work.insert({i, &I});
i++;
}
std::map<int, Instruction*>::iterator it = work.begin();
it->second->eraseFromParent();
return true;
}
The above is my code snippet. Here, in the above code, I would like to remove an instruction randomly.. just for the sake of knowing how to use this api. But, It is ending up with segmentation fault!!, no matter what I try. Need some guidance, here please
Inside Function: change_g
While deleting: i32 %
Use still stuck around after Def is destroyed: %add = add nsw i32 <badref>, %l
opt: /home/user/llvm-project/llvm/lib/IR/Value.cpp:103: llvm::Value::~Value(): Assertion `materialized_use_empty() && "Uses remain when a value is destroyed!"' failed.
First of all, it's not a segmentation fault but an assertion which tells you that something went wrong. In particular the message explains that you can not erase an instruction until any of its uses is still present in function.
Usually you'd first create a new instruction, replace all uses of to-be-removed instruction with new result (via Value::replaceAllUsesWith()) and only then erase.
Related
I'm trying to write what I would think of as an extremely simple piece of code in Rascal: Testing if list A contains list B.
Starting out with some very basic code to create a list of strings
public list[str] makeStringList(int Start, int End)
{
return [ "some string with number <i>" | i <- [Start..End]];
}
public list[str] toTest = makeStringList(0, 200000);
My first try was 'inspired' by the sorting example in the tutor:
public void findClone(list[str] In, str S1, str S2, str S3, str S4, str S5, str S6)
{
switch(In)
{
case [*str head, str i1, str i2, str i3, str i4, str i5, str i6, *str tail]:
{
if(S1 == i1 && S2 == i2 && S3 == i3 && S4 == i4 && S5 == i5 && S6 == i6)
{
println("found duplicate\n\t<i1>\n\t<i2>\n\t<i3>\n\t<i4>\n\t<i5>\n\t<i6>");
}
fail;
}
default:
return;
}
}
Not very pretty, but I expected it to work. Unfortunately, the code runs for about 30 seconds before crashing with an "out of memory" error.
I then tried a better looking alternative:
public void findClone2(list[str] In, list[str] whatWeSearchFor)
{
for ([*str head, *str mid, *str end] := In)
if (mid == whatWeSearchFor)
println("gotcha");
}
with approximately the same result (seems to run a little longer before running out of memory)
Finally, I tried a 'good old' C-style approach with a for-loop
public void findClone3(list[str] In, list[str] whatWeSearchFor)
{
cloneLength = size(whatWeSearchFor);
inputLength = size(In);
if(inputLength < cloneLength) return [];
loopLength = inputLength - cloneLength + 1;
for(int i <- [0..loopLength])
{
isAClone = true;
for(int j <- [0..cloneLength])
{
if(In[i+j] != whatWeSearchFor[j])
isAClone = false;
}
if(isAClone) println("Found clone <whatWeSearchFor> on lines <i> through <i+cloneLength-1>");
}
}
To my surprise, this one works like a charm. No out of memory, and results in seconds.
I get that my first two attempts probably create a lot of temporary string objects that all have to be garbage collected, but I can't believe that the only solution that worked really is the best solution.
Any pointers would be greatly appreciated.
My relevant eclipse.ini settings are
-XX:MaxPermSize=512m
-Xms512m
-Xss64m
-Xmx1G
We'll need to look to see why this is happening. Note that, if you want to use pattern matching, this is maybe a better way to write it:
public void findClone(list[str] In, str S1, str S2, str S3, str S4, str S5, str S6) {
switch(In) {
case [*str head, S1, S2, S3, S4, S5, S6, *str tail]: {
println("found duplicate\n\t<S1>\n\t<S2>\n\t<S3>\n\t<S4>\n\t<S5>\n\t<S6>");
}
default:
return;
}
}
If you do this, you are taking advantage of Rascal's matcher to actually find the matching strings directly, versus your first example in which any string would match but then you needed to use a number of separate comparisons to see if the match represented the combination you were looking for. If I run this on 110145 through 110150 it takes a while but works and it doesn't seem to grow beyond the heap space you allocated to it.
Also, is there a reason you are using fail? Is this to continue searching?
It's an algorithmic issue like Mark Hills said. In Rascal some short code can still entail a lot of nested loops, almost implicitly. Basically every * splice operator on a fresh variable that you use on the pattern side in a list generates one level of loop nesting, except for the last one which is just the rest of the list.
In your code of findClone2 you are first generating all combinations of sublists and then filtering them using the if construct. So that's a correct algorithm, but probably slow. This is your code:
void findClone2(list[str] In, list[str] whatWeSearchFor)
{
for ([*str head, *str mid, *str end] := In)
if (mid == whatWeSearchFor)
println("gotcha");
}
You see how it has a nested loop over In, because it has two effective * operators in the pattern. The code runs therefore in O(n^2), where n is the length of In. I.e. it has quadratic runtime behaviour for the size of the In list. In is a big list so this matters.
In the following new code, we filter first while generating answers, using fewer lines of code:
public void findCloneLinear(list[str] In, list[str] whatWeSearchFor)
{
for ([*str head, *whatWeSearchFor, *str end] := In)
println("gotcha");
}
The second * operator does not generate a new loop because it is not fresh. It just "pastes" the given list values into the pattern. So now there is actually only one effective * which generates a loop which is the first on head. This one makes the algorithm loop over the list. The second * tests if the elements of whatWeSearchFor are all right there in the list after head (this is linear in the size of whatWeSearchFor and then the last *_ just completes the list allowing for more stuff to follow.
It's also nice to know where the clone is sometimes:
public void findCloneLinear(list[str] In, list[str] whatWeSearchFor)
{
for ([*head, *whatWeSearchFor, *_] := In)
println("gotcha at <size(head)>");
}
Rascal does not have an optimising compiler (yet) which might possibly internally transform your algorithms to equivalent optimised ones. So as a Rascal programmer you are still asked to know the effect of loops on your algorithms complexity and know that * is a very short notation for a loop.
This is a question about the ++ operator. It is a question that doesn't solve a problem but I believe that it would be very informative to know the answer. So, while StackOverflow is a source of information, I would like to append the available knowledge here!
So, the problem:
int i = 0;
int getNextInt(){
return i++;
}
This is it. The question is how the ++ operator is implemented in the function call stack and where the increment actually happens when we call that function in our code.
I am really wondering a long time!
It happens after the function returns it's value. In this case, it returns 0 and then increments the variable, so the next time it will return 1
I have no idea what the compiler actually does with regard to the stack, but if it chose to, the compiler could easily rearrange it to this:
int getNextInt() {
int temp = i;
i++;
return temp;
}
i++ is the same as saying i = i+1
It is just a shorthand way of redefining the variable.
I am implementing a parser based on javacc which will be able to GW Basic programs.
I implemented for loop like this
void forloop(Token line):
{
Token toV;
Token toI;
Token step;
Token next;
Token var;
}
{
<FOR> var=<VARIABLE> "=" Expression() { instructions.add("STORE " + var.image); } <TO> toV=<INTEGER> <STEP> step=<INTEGER>
{
instructions.add("LABEL "+labelsCntr);
instructions.add("LOAD "+var.image);
instructions.add("CONST "+toV.image);
instructions.add("SUB");
instructions.add("CONST 0");
}
( Line() )*
next = <INTEGER> <NEXT> <VARIABLE>
{
instructions.add("LINE "+next.image);
instructions.add("LOAD "+step.image);
instructions.add("LOAD "+var.image);
instructions.add("ADD");
instructions.add("JMP LABEL "+(labelsCntr));
labelsCntr++;
}
}
But it does not work.
How can I implement for loop so that it works.
Or where I am doing wrong.
Thanks in advance.
There are two things I don't see in your machine code that I would have expected. One is a conditional jump out of the loop. When the variable exceeds toV, control should jump to the first instruction after the loop. Second I don't see where the var is changed. At the end of the loop you add the value of the variable to the step value, but you don't store the result back into the variable.
There are also a few checks I expect need to be done at compile time that are missing: That the variable in the NEXT statement matches that in the VAR and that the step is positive.
I've been trying to implement a BASIC language interpreter (in C/C++) but I haven't found any book or (thorough) article which explains the process of parsing the language constructs. Some commands are rather complex and hard to parse, especially conditionals and loops, such as IF-THEN-ELSE and FOR-STEP-NEXT, because they can mix variables with constants and entire expressions and code and everything else, for example:
10 IF X = Y + Z THEN GOTO 20 ELSE GOSUB P
20 FOR A = 10 TO B STEP -C : PRINT C$ : PRINT WHATEVER
30 NEXT A
It seems like a nightmare to be able to parse something like that and make it work. And to make things worse, programs written in BASIC can easily be a tangled mess. That's why I need some advice, read some book or whatever to make my mind clear about this subject. What can you suggest?
You've picked a great project - writing interpreters can be lots of fun!
But first, what do we even mean by an interpreter? There are different types of interpreters.
There is the pure interpreter, where you simply interpret each language element as you find it. These are the easiest to write, and the slowest.
A step up, would be to convert each language element into some sort of internal form, and then interpret that. Still pretty easy to write.
The next step, would be to actually parse the language, and generate a syntax tree, and then interpret that. This is somewhat harder to write, but once you've done it a few times, it becomes pretty easy.
Once you have a syntax tree, you can fairly easily generate code for a custom stack virtual machine. A much harder project is to generate code for an existing virtual machine, such as the JVM or CLR.
In programming, like most engineering endeavors, careful planning greatly helps, especially with complicated projects.
So the first step is to decide which type of interpreter you wish to write. If you have not read any of a number of compiler books (e.g., I always recommend Niklaus Wirth's "Compiler Construction" as one of the best introductions to the subject, and is now freely available on the web in PDF form), I would recommend that you go with the pure interpreter.
But you still need to do some additional planning. You need to rigorously define what it is you are going to be interpreting. EBNF is great for this. For a gentile introduction EBNF, read the first three parts of a Simple Compiler at http://www.semware.com/html/compiler.html It is written at the high school level, and should be easy to digest. Yes, I tried it on my kids first :-)
Once you have defined what it is you want to be interpreting, you are ready to write your interpreter.
Abstractly, you're simple interpreter will be divided into a scanner (technically, a lexical analyzer), a parser, and an evaluator. In the simple pure interpolator case, the parser and evaluator will be combined.
Scanners are easy to write, and easy to test, so we won't spend any time on them. See the aforementioned link for info on crafting a simple scanner.
Lets (for example) define your goto statement:
gotostmt -> 'goto' integer
integer -> [0-9]+
This tells us that when we see the token 'goto' (as delivered by the scanner), the only thing that can follow is an integer. And an integer is simply a string a digits.
In pseudo code, we might handle this as so:
(token - is the current token, which is the current element just returned via the scanner)
loop
if token == "goto"
goto_stmt()
elseif token == "gosub"
gosub_stmt()
elseif token == .....
endloop
proc goto_stmt()
expect("goto") -- redundant, but used to skip over goto
if is_numeric(token)
--now, somehow set the instruction pointer at the requested line
else
error("expecting a line number, found '%s'\n", token)
end
end
proc expect(s)
if s == token
getsym()
return true
end
error("Expecting '%s', found: '%s'\n", curr_token, s)
end
See how simple it is? Really, the only hard thing to figure out in a simple interpreter is the handling of expressions. A good recipe for handling those is at: http://www.engr.mun.ca/~theo/Misc/exp_parsing.htm Combined with the aforementioned references, you should have enough to handle the sort of expressions you would encounter in BASIC.
Ok, time for a concrete example. This is from a larger 'pure interpreter', that handles a enhanced version of Tiny BASIC (but big enough to run Tiny Star Trek :-) )
/*------------------------------------------------------------------------
Simple example, pure interpreter, only supports 'goto'
------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdarg.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <setjmp.h>
#include <ctype.h>
enum {False=0, True=1, Max_Lines=300, Max_Len=130};
char *text[Max_Lines+1]; /* array of program lines */
int textp; /* used by scanner - ptr in current line */
char tok[Max_Len+1]; /* the current token */
int cur_line; /* the current line number */
int ch; /* current character */
int num; /* populated if token is an integer */
jmp_buf restart;
int error(const char *fmt, ...) {
va_list ap;
char buf[200];
va_start(ap, fmt);
vsprintf(buf, fmt, ap);
va_end(ap);
printf("%s\n", buf);
longjmp(restart, 1);
return 0;
}
int is_eol(void) {
return ch == '\0' || ch == '\n';
}
void get_ch(void) {
ch = text[cur_line][textp];
if (!is_eol())
textp++;
}
void getsym(void) {
char *cp = tok;
while (ch <= ' ') {
if (is_eol()) {
*cp = '\0';
return;
}
get_ch();
}
if (isalpha(ch)) {
for (; !is_eol() && isalpha(ch); get_ch()) {
*cp++ = (char)ch;
}
*cp = '\0';
} else if (isdigit(ch)) {
for (; !is_eol() && isdigit(ch); get_ch()) {
*cp++ = (char)ch;
}
*cp = '\0';
num = atoi(tok);
} else
error("What? '%c'", ch);
}
void init_getsym(const int n) {
cur_line = n;
textp = 0;
ch = ' ';
getsym();
}
void skip_to_eol(void) {
tok[0] = '\0';
while (!is_eol())
get_ch();
}
int accept(const char s[]) {
if (strcmp(tok, s) == 0) {
getsym();
return True;
}
return False;
}
int expect(const char s[]) {
return accept(s) ? True : error("Expecting '%s', found: %s", s, tok);
}
int valid_line_num(void) {
if (num > 0 && num <= Max_Lines)
return True;
return error("Line number must be between 1 and %d", Max_Lines);
}
void goto_line(void) {
if (valid_line_num())
init_getsym(num);
}
void goto_stmt(void) {
if (isdigit(tok[0]))
goto_line();
else
error("Expecting line number, found: '%s'", tok);
}
void do_cmd(void) {
for (;;) {
while (tok[0] == '\0') {
if (cur_line == 0 || cur_line >= Max_Lines)
return;
init_getsym(cur_line + 1);
}
if (accept("bye")) {
printf("That's all folks!\n");
exit(0);
} else if (accept("run")) {
init_getsym(1);
} else if (accept("goto")) {
goto_stmt();
} else {
error("Unknown token '%s' at line %d", tok, cur_line); return;
}
}
}
int main() {
int i;
for (i = 0; i <= Max_Lines; i++) {
text[i] = calloc(sizeof(char), (Max_Len + 1));
}
setjmp(restart);
for (;;) {
printf("> ");
while (fgets(text[0], Max_Len, stdin) == NULL)
;
if (text[0][0] != '\0') {
init_getsym(0);
if (isdigit(tok[0])) {
if (valid_line_num())
strcpy(text[num], &text[0][textp]);
} else
do_cmd();
}
}
}
Hopefully, that will be enough to get you started. Have fun!
I will certainly get beaten by telling this ...but...:
First, I am actually working on a standalone library ( as a hobby ) that is made of:
a tokenizer, building linear (flat list) of tokens from the source text and following the same sequence as the text ( lexems created from the text flow ).
A parser by hands (syntax analyse; pseudo-compiler )
There is no "pseudo-code" nor "virtual CPU/machine".
Instructions(such as 'return', 'if' 'for' 'while'... then arithemtic expressions ) are represented by a base c++-struct/class and is the object itself. The base object, I name it atom, have a virtual method called "eval", among other common members, that is the "execution/branch" also by itself. So no matter I have an 'if' statement with its possible branchings ( single statement or bloc of statements/instructions ) as true or false condition, it will be called from the base virtual atom::eval() ... and so on for everything that is an atom.
Even 'objects' such as variables are 'atom'. 'eval()' will simply return its value from a variant container held by the atom itself ( pointer, refering to the 'local' variant instance (the instance variant iself) held the 'atom' or to another variant held by an atom that is created in a given 'bloc/stack'. So 'atom' are 'inplace' instructions/objects.
As of now, as an example, chunk of not really meaningful 'code' as below just works:
r = 5!; // 5! : (factorial of 5 )
Response = 1 + 4 - 6 * --r * ((3+5)*(3-4) * 78);
if (Response != 1){ /* '<>' also is not equal op. */
return r^3;
}
else{
return 0;
}
Expressions ( arithemtics ) are built into binary tree expression:
A = b+c; =>
=
/ \
A +
/ \
b c
So the 'instruction'/statement for expression like above is the tree-entry atom that in the above case, is the '=' (binary) operator.
The tree is built with atom::r0,r1,r2 :
atom 'A' :
r0
|
A
/ \
r1 r2
Regarding 'full-duplex' mecanism between c++ runtime and the 'script' library, I've made class_adaptor and adaptor<> :
ex.:
template<typename R, typename ...Args> adaptor_t<T,R, Args...>& import_method(const lstring& mname, R (T::*prop)(Args...)) { ... }
template<typename R, typename ...Args> adaptor_t<T,R, Args...>& import_property(const lstring& mname, R (T::*prop)(Args...)) { ... }
Second: I know there are plenty of tools and libs out there such as lua, boost::bind<*>, QML, JSON, etc... But in my situation, I need to create my very own [edit] 'independant' [/edit] lib for "live scripting". I was scared that my 'interpreter' could take a huge amount of RAM, but I am surprised that it is not as big as using QML,jscript or even lua :-)
Thank you :-)
Don't bother with hacking a parser together by hand. Use a parser generator. lex + yacc is the classic lexer/parser generator combination, but a Google search will reveal plenty of others.
In Lua, using the = operator without an l-value seems to be equivalent to a print(r-value), here are a few examples run in the Lua standalone interpreter:
> = a
nil
> a = 8
> = a
8
> = 'hello'
hello
> = print
function: 003657C8
And so on...
My question is : where can I find a detailed description of this use for the = operator? How does it work? Is it by implying a special default l-value? I guess the root of my problem is that I have no clue what to type in Google to find info about it :-)
edit:
Thanks for the answers, you are right it's a feature of the interpreter. Silly question, for I don't know which reason I completely overlooked the obvious. I should avoid posting before the morning coffee :-) For completeness, here is the code dealing with this in the interpreter:
while ((status = loadline(L)) != -1) {
if (status == 0) status = docall(L, 0, 0);
report(L, status);
if (status == 0 && lua_gettop(L) > 0) { /* any result to print? */
lua_getglobal(L, "print");
lua_insert(L, 1);
if (lua_pcall(L, lua_gettop(L)-1, 0, 0) != 0)
l_message(progname, lua_pushfstring(L,
"error calling " LUA_QL("print") " (%s)",
lua_tostring(L, -1)));
}
}
edit2:
To be really complete, the whole trick about pushing values on the stack is in the "pushline" function:
if (firstline && b[0] == '=') /* first line starts with `=' ? */
lua_pushfstring(L, "return %s", b+1); /* change it to `return' */
Quoting the man page:
In interactive mode ... If a line starts with '=', then lua displays the values of all the expressions in the remainder of the line. The expressions must be separated by commas.
I think that must be a feature of the stand alone interpreter. I can't make that work on anything I have compiled lua into.
I wouldn't call it a feature - the interpreter just returns the result of the statement. It's his job, isn't it?
Assignment isn't an expression that returns something in Lua like it is in C.