Skip to content

Conversation

Octachron
Copy link
Owner

This is the twice-functorized version of #3 with improved naming and documentation.
I am planning to merge this into the main PR (cc @gasche).

Copy link

@gasche gasche left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I pre-reviewed this in #3 (comment) and I think it looks nice, an improvement over the current codebase.

| Insert of right
| Keep of left * right * eq
| Change of left * right * diff
val generalize: change -> (left,right,eq,diff) Generic.change
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I still don't understand why we are doing this instead of type change = (left,right,eq,diff) Generic.change.

I asked @Octachron in #3 (comment), and his answer was

This has the advantage of making the update and test handles the correct change type by construction since the specialized change type is the only one in scope.

I'm not sure what this means (it's probably about typed-based constructor disambiguation?), but I don't really know what explanation would be convincing enough to justify a second copy of a type and a weird generalize function in the API.

Copy link
Owner Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I intended to say that this duplicated definition reduces the need for type annotations in implementation because type-directed disambiguation is not needed. However, looking at the code of the existing implementations, I use the annotation half of the time (and it avoids an open). My conclusion is thus that this was a premature API optimization.

@Octachron Octachron force-pushed the semdiff_typedecl_with_functors branch from bbb26b4 to 7a0a4d8 Compare June 22, 2021 11:36
@Octachron Octachron merged commit 9834868 into semdiff_type_decl Jun 22, 2021
Octachron pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 29, 2024
Effect syntax: error on nonlinear patterns in effect cases
Octachron pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 26, 2024
…l#13294)

The toplevel printer detects cycles by keeping a hashtable of values
that it has already traversed.

However, some OCaml runtime types (at least bigarrays) may be
partially uninitialized, and hashing them at arbitrary program points
may read uninitialized memory. In particular, the OCaml testsuite
fails when running with a memory-sanitizer enabled, as bigarray
printing results in reads to uninitialized memory:

```
==133712==WARNING: MemorySanitizer: use-of-uninitialized-value
    #0 0x4e6d11 in caml_ba_hash /var/home/edwin/git/ocaml/runtime/bigarray.c:486:45
    #1 0x52474a in caml_hash /var/home/edwin/git/ocaml/runtime/hash.c:251:35
    #2 0x599ebf in caml_interprete /var/home/edwin/git/ocaml/runtime/interp.c:1065:14
    #3 0x5a909a in caml_main /var/home/edwin/git/ocaml/runtime/startup_byt.c:575:9
    #4 0x540ccb in main /var/home/edwin/git/ocaml/runtime/main.c:37:3
    #5 0x7f0910abb087 in __libc_start_call_main (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x2a087) (BuildId: 8f53abaad945a669f2bdcd25f471d80e077568ef)
    #6 0x7f0910abb14a in __libc_start_main@GLIBC_2.2.5 (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x2a14a) (BuildId: 8f53abaad945a669f2bdcd25f471d80e077568ef)
    #7 0x441804 in _start (/var/home/edwin/git/ocaml/runtime/ocamlrun+0x441804) (BuildId: 7a60eef57e1c2baf770bc38d10d6c227e60ead37)

  Uninitialized value was created by a heap allocation
    #0 0x47d306 in malloc (/var/home/edwin/git/ocaml/runtime/ocamlrun+0x47d306) (BuildId: 7a60eef57e1c2baf770bc38d10d6c227e60ead37)
    #1 0x4e7960 in caml_ba_alloc /var/home/edwin/git/ocaml/runtime/bigarray.c:246:12
    #2 0x4e801f in caml_ba_create /var/home/edwin/git/ocaml/runtime/bigarray.c:673:10
    #3 0x59b8fc in caml_interprete /var/home/edwin/git/ocaml/runtime/interp.c:1058:14
    #4 0x5a909a in caml_main /var/home/edwin/git/ocaml/runtime/startup_byt.c:575:9
    #5 0x540ccb in main /var/home/edwin/git/ocaml/runtime/main.c:37:3
    #6 0x7f0910abb087 in __libc_start_call_main (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x2a087) (BuildId: 8f53abaad945a669f2bdcd25f471d80e077568ef)
    #7 0x7f0910abb14a in __libc_start_main@GLIBC_2.2.5 (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x2a14a) (BuildId: 8f53abaad945a669f2bdcd25f471d80e077568ef)
    #8 0x441804 in _start (/var/home/edwin/git/ocaml/runtime/ocamlrun+0x441804) (BuildId: 7a60eef57e1c2baf770bc38d10d6c227e60ead37)

SUMMARY: MemorySanitizer: use-of-uninitialized-value /var/home/edwin/git/ocaml/runtime/bigarray.c:486:45 in caml_ba_hash
```

The only use of hashing in genprintval is to avoid cycles, that is, it
is only useful for OCaml values that contain other OCaml values
(including possibly themselves). Bigarrays cannot introduce cycles,
and they are always printed as "<abstr>" anyway.

The present commit proposes to be more conservative in which values
are hashed by the cycle detector to avoid this issue: we skip hashing
any value with tag above No_scan_tag -- which may not contain any
OCaml values.

Suggested-by: Gabriel Scherer <[email protected]>

Signed-off-by: Edwin Török <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Edwin Török <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants