pghs975uc
/
infer_clone
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Releases Wiki Activity
You can not select more than 25 topics Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
Branches Tags
${ item.name }
Create tag ${ searchTerm }
Create branch ${ searchTerm }
from '53b2ec61de'
${ noResults }
infer_clone/infer/tests/codetoanalyze/c/frontend/switchstmt/switch_unroll.c.dot

113 lines
7.3 KiB
Raw Normal View History Unescape

[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
/* @generated */
digraph cfg {
Get rid of Declare_locals Reviewed By: jeremydubreil Differential Revision: D9234331 fbshipit-source-id: 70443eabe
6 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_1" [label="1: Start unroll_loop\nFormals: n:int\nLocals: loop:int ret:int \n " color=yellow style=filled]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_1" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_26" ;
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_2" [label="2: Exit unroll_loop \n " color=yellow style=filled]
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_3" [label="3: Return Stmt \n n$0=*&ret:int [line 24, column 10]\n " shape="box"]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_3" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_4" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_4" [label="4: Return Stmt \n *&return:int=n$0 [line 24, column 3]\n " shape="box"]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_4" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_2" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_5" [label="5: SwitchStmt \n n$1=*&n:int [line 10, column 11]\n " shape="box"]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_5" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_23" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_5" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_24" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_6" [label="6: + \n " ]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_6" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_16" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_7" [label="7: BinaryOperatorStmt: GT \n n$2=*&loop:int [line 22, column 16]\n *&loop:int=(n$2 - 1) [line 22, column 16]\n " shape="box"]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_7" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_8" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_7" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_9" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_8" [label="8: Prune (true branch, do while) \n PRUNE(((n$2 - 1) > 0), true); [line 22, column 16]\n " shape="invhouse"]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_8" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_6" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_9" [label="9: Prune (false branch, do while) \n PRUNE(!((n$2 - 1) > 0), false); [line 22, column 16]\n " shape="invhouse"]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_9" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_3" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_10" [label="10: UnaryOperator \n n$3=*&ret:int [line 21, column 11]\n *&ret:int=(n$3 + 1) [line 21, column 11]\n " shape="box"]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_10" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_7" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_11" [label="11: + \n " ]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_11" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_10" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_12" [label="12: Prune (true branch, if) \n PRUNE(1, true); [line 16, column 15]\n " shape="invhouse"]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_12" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_14" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_13" [label="13: Prune (false branch, if) \n PRUNE(!1, false); [line 16, column 15]\n " shape="invhouse"]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_13" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_11" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_14" [label="14: UnaryOperator \n n$4=*&ret:int [line 18, column 15]\n *&ret:int=(n$4 + 1) [line 18, column 15]\n " shape="box"]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_14" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_11" ;
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_15" [label="15: UnaryOperator \n n$7=*&ret:int [line 15, column 11]\n *&ret:int=(n$7 + 1) [line 15, column 11]\n " shape="box"]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_15" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_12" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_15" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_13" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_16" [label="16: UnaryOperator \n n$8=*&ret:int [line 13, column 9]\n *&ret:int=(n$8 + 1) [line 13, column 9]\n " shape="box"]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_16" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_15" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_17" [label="17: Prune (true branch, switch) \n PRUNE(((n$1 % 8) == 1), true); [line 20, column 9]\n " shape="invhouse"]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_17" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_10" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_18" [label="18: Prune (false branch, switch) \n PRUNE(!((n$1 % 8) == 1), false); [line 20, column 9]\n " shape="invhouse"]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_18" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_3" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_19" [label="19: Prune (true branch, switch) \n PRUNE(((n$1 % 8) == 2), true); [line 17, column 13]\n " shape="invhouse"]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_19" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_14" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_20" [label="20: Prune (false branch, switch) \n PRUNE(!((n$1 % 8) == 2), false); [line 17, column 13]\n " shape="invhouse"]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_20" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_17" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_20" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_18" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_21" [label="21: Prune (true branch, switch) \n PRUNE(((n$1 % 8) == 3), true); [line 14, column 9]\n " shape="invhouse"]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_21" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_15" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_22" [label="22: Prune (false branch, switch) \n PRUNE(!((n$1 % 8) == 3), false); [line 14, column 9]\n " shape="invhouse"]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_22" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_19" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_22" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_20" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_23" [label="23: Prune (true branch, switch) \n PRUNE(((n$1 % 8) == 0), true); [line 11, column 5]\n " shape="invhouse"]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_23" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_6" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_24" [label="24: Prune (false branch, switch) \n PRUNE(!((n$1 % 8) == 0), false); [line 11, column 5]\n " shape="invhouse"]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_24" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_21" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_24" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_22" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_25" [label="25: DeclStmt \n VARIABLE_DECLARED(loop:int); [line 9, column 3]\n n$11=*&n:int [line 9, column 14]\n *&loop:int=(n$11 + (3 / 4)) [line 9, column 3]\n " shape="box"]
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
[clang] change the way we wire up return statements Summary: Split the translation of return more aggressively between: 1. the instruction that has to happen before the translation of the sub-expr 2. the sub-expr 3. the instruction that has to happen after the sub-expr This is needed for the next diff which creates potentially large CFGs in (2). Reviewed By: da319 Differential Revision: D24954071 fbshipit-source-id: a7e7e2527
4 years ago
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_25" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_5" ;
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_26" [label="26: DeclStmt \n VARIABLE_DECLARED(ret:int); [line 8, column 3]\n *&ret:int=0 [line 8, column 3]\n " shape="box"]
"unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_26" -> "unroll_loop.7d9e50ecf5e5106a8dd5deee005639d6_25" ;
[clang] make switch statement translation more robust Summary: Labels inside switch statements were causing havoc (see test), and the translation of switch statements in general could be improved to handle more cases. It turns out that `case` (and `default`) statements are more or less fancy labels into the code. In other words, if you erase all the `case XXX:` and `default:` strings in the `switch` statement you get the real structure of the program, and `switch` just jumps straight to the first `case` directives (and to the second if the first one is not satisfied, etc. until all `case`/`default` have been considered). This suggests an alternative implementation: translate the body of the `switch` and simply record the list of switch cases inside that body, along with where they point to. Then post-process this list to construct the control flow of the `switch`, which points into the control-flow of the `body`. In order not to modify every function in `CTrans` to propagate the current list of cases, I created an ugly `ref` inside `SwitchCase` instead (but it cannot be directly accessed and it's guaranteed to be well-parenthesised wrt nested switches by the `SwitchCase` API so it's not too bad). [unrelated] Also make translation failures output more information about what exactly in the source code is causing the crash, and the ancestors in the AST that lead to the crash site. Reviewed By: martinoluca Differential Revision: D8011046 fbshipit-source-id: 8455090
7 years ago
}