Skip to content
GitLab

Overloading errorrs · Changes

Page history
Save state of Overloading-errorrs.md before reducing the cases authored by Quinten Cabo's avatar Quinten Cabo
Hide whitespace changes
Inline Side-by-side
error-messages/Overloading-errorrs.md
View page @ bd5b7fc0
In sac, you can [overload](../concepts/Overloading.md) functions.
In sac, you can [overload](../concepts/Overloading.md) functions.
This is great but the errors relating to this feature can be improved a lot.
## Show available options if no type match is found
## Show available options if no type match is found
If you have a program like this:
......@@ -21,6 +20,7 @@ int main() {
```
The current error is:
```
All instances of "main" contain type errors
No matching definition found for the application of "_MAIN::foo" to arguments ( int[2]{2,3})
......@@ -41,9 +41,236 @@ int[3] -> void
bool -> bool
```
Notice the formatting of the types.
The arrows are alligned to make it more readable.
Sijmen did an internship about this.
Notice the formatting of the types.
The arrows are alligned to make it more readable.
Sijmen did an internship about this.
Make sure to say and make clear if you assign the result of a function you can never call the version that returns void!
# Function not found
We should give a different error if no function with this name is available!
If we want to raise the error of no instance available we should look in the ast at the function names if it does exist.
Then we could also do a similarity thing based on types and names.
## Name based suggestions
If we do a suggestion based on the name we could try to look for an existing name that is similar up to some distance.
For instance edit distance of 2. We should first look in the _MAIN namespace, then the imported modules.
Let's make two suggestions.
Maybe you meant tho call %s or %s?
If we don't find anything we can say something like.
I looked for functions with names similar to %s, but I could not find any.
But only if there is no function available of this name at all!
Otherwise, we just assume you did the overload wrong.
Let's first just implement Levistein edit distance and after
that [keyboard or typing distance](https://github.com/MaxHalford/clavier?tab=readme-ov-file#distance-between-words).
How are we actually going to do this?
We know how many different functions there are in the program.
Well so we know how many function defs we so we know how much we have to malloc in the worst cost if they are all
different.
Lemma haha : To know how many different functions there are in the program we already need to have the data structure to
store them.
An iterable set of strings is a good data structure for this.
We could also just allocate the max we need.
We could then just loop over all the function names and calculate the distance.
## Number of arguments suggestion
At the create_wrappers stage of the compiler they make wrapper functions for functions with same name and same number of arguments and return values.
If you call a function for which a wrapper does not exist you get
```c
CTIabort (NODE_LOCATION (arg_node),
"No definition found for a function \"%s::%s\" that expects"
" %zu argument(s) and yields %zu return value(s)",
NSgetName (SPAP_NS (arg_node)), SPAP_NAME (arg_node), num_args,
INFO_EXPRETS (arg_info));
```
This can be a lot better.
This error often triggers when:
1. a: The programmer calls a function that just does not exist anywhere
1. The function is named sel
2. There exists a simiarly named function, e.g. detect typo
3. There does not exist a similarly named function.
2. b: The programmer calls a version of a function that does not exist
1. Not assigning the result of the function to a variable.
Calling the version that returns void, which often does not exist.
2. Only incorrect number of return values but more than 0.
3. Only incorrect number of arguments.
4. Incorrect number of arguments AND return values!
# a
## a1
In this case the programmer did arr[1] without having a sel function.
It is not intuitive that the arr[1] syntax requires the sel function.
We should give a special error message for this case.
```
The '%s' function is not defined anywhere.
sel is called when you do an array index like this: a[12]
You can get a working sel from the standard library by adding:
use Array: {sel};
to the top of the file.
```
## a2
In this case the whole function just doesn't exist.
We can assume that the programmer makes a typo.
With a typo there is probably a function that is named similarly.
Check all the function names edit distance and make a suggestion based on
if a function name has damerau_levenshtein_distance =< EDIT_DISTANCE_TRESHOLD
with the ap then we give a hint to use that function.
```
The '%s' function is not defined anywhere.
Hint: Did you mean call the '%s' function instead?
```
## a3
If there is no function defined with a name that is
damerau_levenshtein_distance =< EDIT_DISTANCE_TRESHOLD to the function name
being called give an error that there is no function with this name and also
not one that kind of has the same name.
```
The '%s' function is not defined anywhere.
I could not find another function with a similar names to recommend.
Hint:\n Check that you have:
• Imported/use the correct library
• Used the correct function name
• Defined the function
```
# b
## b1
I think that b1 is a special case for which we should make a specific error
message which explains that you have to assign the result to a variable or
define a version that returns void.
As soon as we find out this is the case we should tell them about that
not assining tries to call the void overload.
The error for this is now:
```
You are using the '%s' function without using or assigning its result but no void returning implementation of foo exists.
In SAC, if you do not use the result of a function application the
overloading mechanism expects an implementation which returns void.
None of the implementation of %s return void.
Hint:
• Assign the result to a variable e.g., 'var = %s(...)'
• Or define a void-returning version `void %s(...) {}`)
```
## Info gathering for b2 b3 and b4
How do we know if the arity is right?
We need to ask two questions in order to get 3 awnsers.
1. Does an instance exist with the right amount of args?
2. Does an instance exist with the right amount of returns?
- If 1 and 2 then you wouldn't have the error so that never happens,
- If 1 and not 2 you had the wrong number of returns (case b2)
- If not 1 and 2 you had the wrong number of arguments (case b3)
- If not 1 and not 2 you had the wrong number of arguments and returns (case b4)
## b2
In this case we can say that the number of return values are wrong.
We can list the different numbers of valid return values.
At least get the different cases of functions.
We can still make the function type printer :)
```
Invalid call to foo:
The number of return values does not match any existing implementation.
Available implementations of foo include:
a, b = foo(...) (2 returns)
a, b, c = foo(...) (3 returns)
a, b, c, d = foo(...) (4 returns)
The number of arguments is correct. There is an instance with 1 argument.
```
## b3
In this case the we can say that the number of arguments is wrong.
We can list the different numbers of valid arguments.
```
"Invalid call to foo: the number of arguments does not match any existing implementation.
Available implementations of foo:
foo(arg1) (1 argument)
foo(arg1, arg2) (2 arguments)
foo(arg1, arg2, arg3) (3 arguments)
The number of return values is correct."
```
Hopefully we can get the types in there maybe or the arg names
## b4
In this case we say you got both the
```
Invalid call to foo: the number of arguments and return values does not match any existing implementation.
Available implementations of foo:
a = foo(arg1) (1 argument, 1 return)
a, b = foo(arg1, arg2) (2 arguments, 2 returns)
a = foo(arg1, arg2, arg3) (3 arguments, 1 return)
```
Allign based on longest returns and longest arguments.
The tab at the start is nice!
## Type based suggestions
With the wrapper functions it only looks at number of arguments and return values not the types.
Later we can also look at the types!
I think that the name is more likely to be the right suggestion for a function call that does not exist.
Yeah. Because finding a function with the same type might do something complelty different as there are not so many
types.
Also doing suggestions based on passed in types would mean that this phase has to move down in the compiler.
Because mostly functions in sac only have 1 to 3 inputs really and there are not that many types so you might not get
the function you want.
But we should make it print all the versions of a function.
## Global objects are printed
If you have code like this:
......@@ -59,15 +286,17 @@ int main() {
}
```
Currently, the compiler prints the global objects that are woven true in the overloading error message.
Currently, the compiler prints the global objects that are woven true in the overloading error message.
```
No definition found for a function "_MAIN::foo" that accepts an argument of type "bool{1}" as parameter no 3. Full argument types are "( Terminal::Terminal, TermFile::TermFile, bool{1})".
Compilation failed while Running type inference system, 1 warning(s).
```
I think that this can be very confusing for the programmer.
Especially because the parameter number does not match up with the parameter number in their source code.
I think that this can be very confusing for the programmer.
Especially because the parameter number does not match up with the parameter number in their source code.
We could perhaps try to hide the global objects.
## Not assigning a function to a result overloads to void return types is unclear
......@@ -95,7 +324,8 @@ Not assigned, got 3
Assigned!
```
If you call an overloaded function without assigning the result to a variable the compiler will pick the version that returns void.
If you call an overloaded function without assigning the result to a variable the compiler will pick the version that
returns void.
However, the error message about this is not very clear. Let's say you have:
......@@ -104,7 +334,7 @@ int ten() { return 10;}
void main() { ten(); }
```
You get:
You get:
```
./test.sac:3:15: abort:
......@@ -112,8 +342,8 @@ You get:
Compilation failed while Converting to static single assignment form, 1 warning(s).
```
I found this very unclear when I started out with sac.
I was used to programming languages just dropping the return value.
I found this very unclear when I started out with sac.
I was used to programming languages just dropping the return value.
We should say something about this in the error message:
```
......@@ -136,7 +366,7 @@ use StdIO: all;
void foo() { printf("void\n"); return;}
// Works without the printf.
int foo() { printf("Bug"); return 137;}
int foo() { printf("Bug"); return 137;}
int main() {
foo();
......@@ -156,8 +386,10 @@ int foo() { return 137;}
int main() { return 0; }
```
You get this error message.
`
```
Cannot overload functions of arity 0
```
......