Summary:
This was left as a TODO before: where to place calls to destructors for
C++ temporaries that are only conditionally creating when evaluating an
expression. This can happen inside the branches of a conditional
operation `b?e:f` or in potentially-short-circuited conditions on the
righ-hand side of `&&` and `||` operators.
Following the compilation scheme of clang (observed by looking at the
generated LLVM bitcode), we instrument the program with "marker"
variables, so that for instance `X x = true?X():y;` becomes (following
the execution on the true branch):
```
marker1 = 0; // initialize all markers to 0
PRUNE(true) // entering true branch
X::X(&temporary); // create temporary...
marker1 = 1; // ...triggers setting its marker to 1
X::X(&x, &temporary); // finish expression
if (marker1) {
X::~X(&temporary); // conditionally destroy the temporary
}
```
In this diff, you'll find code for:
- associating markers to temporaries that need them
- code to initialize markers to 0 before full-expressions
- code to conditionally destroy temporaries based on the values of the
markers once the full-expression has finished evaluating
Reviewed By: da319
Differential Revision: D24954070
fbshipit-source-id: cf15df7f7
Summary: Inject destructor calls to destroy a temporary when its lifetime ends.
Reviewed By: mbouaziz
Differential Revision: D15674209
fbshipit-source-id: 0f783a906
Summary:
This started as an attempt to understand how to modify the frontend to
inject destructors for C++ temporaries (see next diffs).
This diff rewrites the existing logic for computing the list of
variables that should be destroyed at the end of each statement, either
because it's the end of their syntactic scope or because control flow
branches outside of their syntactic scope.
The frontend translates a function from the last instructions to the
first, but scope computation needs to be done in the other direction, so
it's done in a separate pass *before* the main translation happens. That
first pass creates a map from statements in the AST to the list of
variables that should be destroyed at the end of these statements. This
is still the case now.
Before, that map would be computed in a bit of a weird way: scopes are
naturally a stack but instead of that the structure maintained was a
flat list + a counter to know where the current scope ended in that
list.
In this diff, redo the computation maintaining a stack of scopes
instead, which is a bit cleaner. Also treat more instructions as
introducing a new scope, eg if, for, ...
Reviewed By: mbouaziz
Differential Revision: D15674208
fbshipit-source-id: c92429e82
Jules Villard