| ================================================== |
| Kaleidoscope: Extending the Language: Control Flow |
| ================================================== |
| |
| .. contents:: |
| :local: |
| |
| Chapter 5 Introduction |
| ====================== |
| |
| Welcome to Chapter 5 of the "`Implementing a language with |
| LLVM <index.html>`_" tutorial. Parts 1-4 described the implementation of |
| the simple Kaleidoscope language and included support for generating |
| LLVM IR, followed by optimizations and a JIT compiler. Unfortunately, as |
| presented, Kaleidoscope is mostly useless: it has no control flow other |
| than call and return. This means that you can't have conditional |
| branches in the code, significantly limiting its power. In this episode |
| of "build that compiler", we'll extend Kaleidoscope to have an |
| if/then/else expression plus a simple 'for' loop. |
| |
| If/Then/Else |
| ============ |
| |
| Extending Kaleidoscope to support if/then/else is quite straightforward. |
| It basically requires adding support for this "new" concept to the |
| lexer, parser, AST, and LLVM code emitter. This example is nice, because |
| it shows how easy it is to "grow" a language over time, incrementally |
| extending it as new ideas are discovered. |
| |
| Before we get going on "how" we add this extension, let's talk about |
| "what" we want. The basic idea is that we want to be able to write this |
| sort of thing: |
| |
| :: |
| |
| def fib(x) |
| if x < 3 then |
| 1 |
| else |
| fib(x-1)+fib(x-2); |
| |
| In Kaleidoscope, every construct is an expression: there are no |
| statements. As such, the if/then/else expression needs to return a value |
| like any other. Since we're using a mostly functional form, we'll have |
| it evaluate its conditional, then return the 'then' or 'else' value |
| based on how the condition was resolved. This is very similar to the C |
| "?:" expression. |
| |
| The semantics of the if/then/else expression is that it evaluates the |
| condition to a boolean equality value: 0.0 is considered to be false and |
| everything else is considered to be true. If the condition is true, the |
| first subexpression is evaluated and returned, if the condition is |
| false, the second subexpression is evaluated and returned. Since |
| Kaleidoscope allows side-effects, this behavior is important to nail |
| down. |
| |
| Now that we know what we "want", let's break this down into its |
| constituent pieces. |
| |
| Lexer Extensions for If/Then/Else |
| --------------------------------- |
| |
| The lexer extensions are straightforward. First we add new enum values |
| for the relevant tokens: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| // control |
| tok_if = -6, |
| tok_then = -7, |
| tok_else = -8, |
| |
| Once we have that, we recognize the new keywords in the lexer. This is |
| pretty simple stuff: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| ... |
| if (IdentifierStr == "def") |
| return tok_def; |
| if (IdentifierStr == "extern") |
| return tok_extern; |
| if (IdentifierStr == "if") |
| return tok_if; |
| if (IdentifierStr == "then") |
| return tok_then; |
| if (IdentifierStr == "else") |
| return tok_else; |
| return tok_identifier; |
| |
| AST Extensions for If/Then/Else |
| ------------------------------- |
| |
| To represent the new expression we add a new AST node for it: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| /// IfExprAST - Expression class for if/then/else. |
| class IfExprAST : public ExprAST { |
| std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> Cond, Then, Else; |
| |
| public: |
| IfExprAST(std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> Cond, std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> Then, |
| std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> Else) |
| : Cond(std::move(Cond)), Then(std::move(Then)), Else(std::move(Else)) {} |
| |
| Value *codegen() override; |
| }; |
| |
| The AST node just has pointers to the various subexpressions. |
| |
| Parser Extensions for If/Then/Else |
| ---------------------------------- |
| |
| Now that we have the relevant tokens coming from the lexer and we have |
| the AST node to build, our parsing logic is relatively straightforward. |
| First we define a new parsing function: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| /// ifexpr ::= 'if' expression 'then' expression 'else' expression |
| static std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> ParseIfExpr() { |
| getNextToken(); // eat the if. |
| |
| // condition. |
| auto Cond = ParseExpression(); |
| if (!Cond) |
| return nullptr; |
| |
| if (CurTok != tok_then) |
| return LogError("expected then"); |
| getNextToken(); // eat the then |
| |
| auto Then = ParseExpression(); |
| if (!Then) |
| return nullptr; |
| |
| if (CurTok != tok_else) |
| return LogError("expected else"); |
| |
| getNextToken(); |
| |
| auto Else = ParseExpression(); |
| if (!Else) |
| return nullptr; |
| |
| return llvm::make_unique<IfExprAST>(std::move(Cond), std::move(Then), |
| std::move(Else)); |
| } |
| |
| Next we hook it up as a primary expression: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| static std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> ParsePrimary() { |
| switch (CurTok) { |
| default: |
| return LogError("unknown token when expecting an expression"); |
| case tok_identifier: |
| return ParseIdentifierExpr(); |
| case tok_number: |
| return ParseNumberExpr(); |
| case '(': |
| return ParseParenExpr(); |
| case tok_if: |
| return ParseIfExpr(); |
| } |
| } |
| |
| LLVM IR for If/Then/Else |
| ------------------------ |
| |
| Now that we have it parsing and building the AST, the final piece is |
| adding LLVM code generation support. This is the most interesting part |
| of the if/then/else example, because this is where it starts to |
| introduce new concepts. All of the code above has been thoroughly |
| described in previous chapters. |
| |
| To motivate the code we want to produce, let's take a look at a simple |
| example. Consider: |
| |
| :: |
| |
| extern foo(); |
| extern bar(); |
| def baz(x) if x then foo() else bar(); |
| |
| If you disable optimizations, the code you'll (soon) get from |
| Kaleidoscope looks like this: |
| |
| .. code-block:: llvm |
| |
| declare double @foo() |
| |
| declare double @bar() |
| |
| define double @baz(double %x) { |
| entry: |
| %ifcond = fcmp one double %x, 0.000000e+00 |
| br i1 %ifcond, label %then, label %else |
| |
| then: ; preds = %entry |
| %calltmp = call double @foo() |
| br label %ifcont |
| |
| else: ; preds = %entry |
| %calltmp1 = call double @bar() |
| br label %ifcont |
| |
| ifcont: ; preds = %else, %then |
| %iftmp = phi double [ %calltmp, %then ], [ %calltmp1, %else ] |
| ret double %iftmp |
| } |
| |
| To visualize the control flow graph, you can use a nifty feature of the |
| LLVM '`opt <http://llvm.org/cmds/opt.html>`_' tool. If you put this LLVM |
| IR into "t.ll" and run "``llvm-as < t.ll | opt -analyze -view-cfg``", `a |
| window will pop up <../ProgrammersManual.html#viewing-graphs-while-debugging-code>`_ and you'll |
| see this graph: |
| |
| .. figure:: LangImpl05-cfg.png |
| :align: center |
| :alt: Example CFG |
| |
| Example CFG |
| |
| Another way to get this is to call "``F->viewCFG()``" or |
| "``F->viewCFGOnly()``" (where F is a "``Function*``") either by |
| inserting actual calls into the code and recompiling or by calling these |
| in the debugger. LLVM has many nice features for visualizing various |
| graphs. |
| |
| Getting back to the generated code, it is fairly simple: the entry block |
| evaluates the conditional expression ("x" in our case here) and compares |
| the result to 0.0 with the "``fcmp one``" instruction ('one' is "Ordered |
| and Not Equal"). Based on the result of this expression, the code jumps |
| to either the "then" or "else" blocks, which contain the expressions for |
| the true/false cases. |
| |
| Once the then/else blocks are finished executing, they both branch back |
| to the 'ifcont' block to execute the code that happens after the |
| if/then/else. In this case the only thing left to do is to return to the |
| caller of the function. The question then becomes: how does the code |
| know which expression to return? |
| |
| The answer to this question involves an important SSA operation: the |
| `Phi |
| operation <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Static_single_assignment_form>`_. |
| If you're not familiar with SSA, `the wikipedia |
| article <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Static_single_assignment_form>`_ |
| is a good introduction and there are various other introductions to it |
| available on your favorite search engine. The short version is that |
| "execution" of the Phi operation requires "remembering" which block |
| control came from. The Phi operation takes on the value corresponding to |
| the input control block. In this case, if control comes in from the |
| "then" block, it gets the value of "calltmp". If control comes from the |
| "else" block, it gets the value of "calltmp1". |
| |
| At this point, you are probably starting to think "Oh no! This means my |
| simple and elegant front-end will have to start generating SSA form in |
| order to use LLVM!". Fortunately, this is not the case, and we strongly |
| advise *not* implementing an SSA construction algorithm in your |
| front-end unless there is an amazingly good reason to do so. In |
| practice, there are two sorts of values that float around in code |
| written for your average imperative programming language that might need |
| Phi nodes: |
| |
| #. Code that involves user variables: ``x = 1; x = x + 1;`` |
| #. Values that are implicit in the structure of your AST, such as the |
| Phi node in this case. |
| |
| In `Chapter 7 <LangImpl07.html>`_ of this tutorial ("mutable variables"), |
| we'll talk about #1 in depth. For now, just believe me that you don't |
| need SSA construction to handle this case. For #2, you have the choice |
| of using the techniques that we will describe for #1, or you can insert |
| Phi nodes directly, if convenient. In this case, it is really |
| easy to generate the Phi node, so we choose to do it directly. |
| |
| Okay, enough of the motivation and overview, let's generate code! |
| |
| Code Generation for If/Then/Else |
| -------------------------------- |
| |
| In order to generate code for this, we implement the ``codegen`` method |
| for ``IfExprAST``: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| Value *IfExprAST::codegen() { |
| Value *CondV = Cond->codegen(); |
| if (!CondV) |
| return nullptr; |
| |
| // Convert condition to a bool by comparing non-equal to 0.0. |
| CondV = Builder.CreateFCmpONE( |
| CondV, ConstantFP::get(TheContext, APFloat(0.0)), "ifcond"); |
| |
| This code is straightforward and similar to what we saw before. We emit |
| the expression for the condition, then compare that value to zero to get |
| a truth value as a 1-bit (bool) value. |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| Function *TheFunction = Builder.GetInsertBlock()->getParent(); |
| |
| // Create blocks for the then and else cases. Insert the 'then' block at the |
| // end of the function. |
| BasicBlock *ThenBB = |
| BasicBlock::Create(TheContext, "then", TheFunction); |
| BasicBlock *ElseBB = BasicBlock::Create(TheContext, "else"); |
| BasicBlock *MergeBB = BasicBlock::Create(TheContext, "ifcont"); |
| |
| Builder.CreateCondBr(CondV, ThenBB, ElseBB); |
| |
| This code creates the basic blocks that are related to the if/then/else |
| statement, and correspond directly to the blocks in the example above. |
| The first line gets the current Function object that is being built. It |
| gets this by asking the builder for the current BasicBlock, and asking |
| that block for its "parent" (the function it is currently embedded |
| into). |
| |
| Once it has that, it creates three blocks. Note that it passes |
| "TheFunction" into the constructor for the "then" block. This causes the |
| constructor to automatically insert the new block into the end of the |
| specified function. The other two blocks are created, but aren't yet |
| inserted into the function. |
| |
| Once the blocks are created, we can emit the conditional branch that |
| chooses between them. Note that creating new blocks does not implicitly |
| affect the IRBuilder, so it is still inserting into the block that the |
| condition went into. Also note that it is creating a branch to the |
| "then" block and the "else" block, even though the "else" block isn't |
| inserted into the function yet. This is all ok: it is the standard way |
| that LLVM supports forward references. |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| // Emit then value. |
| Builder.SetInsertPoint(ThenBB); |
| |
| Value *ThenV = Then->codegen(); |
| if (!ThenV) |
| return nullptr; |
| |
| Builder.CreateBr(MergeBB); |
| // Codegen of 'Then' can change the current block, update ThenBB for the PHI. |
| ThenBB = Builder.GetInsertBlock(); |
| |
| After the conditional branch is inserted, we move the builder to start |
| inserting into the "then" block. Strictly speaking, this call moves the |
| insertion point to be at the end of the specified block. However, since |
| the "then" block is empty, it also starts out by inserting at the |
| beginning of the block. :) |
| |
| Once the insertion point is set, we recursively codegen the "then" |
| expression from the AST. To finish off the "then" block, we create an |
| unconditional branch to the merge block. One interesting (and very |
| important) aspect of the LLVM IR is that it `requires all basic blocks |
| to be "terminated" <../LangRef.html#functionstructure>`_ with a `control |
| flow instruction <../LangRef.html#terminators>`_ such as return or |
| branch. This means that all control flow, *including fall throughs* must |
| be made explicit in the LLVM IR. If you violate this rule, the verifier |
| will emit an error. |
| |
| The final line here is quite subtle, but is very important. The basic |
| issue is that when we create the Phi node in the merge block, we need to |
| set up the block/value pairs that indicate how the Phi will work. |
| Importantly, the Phi node expects to have an entry for each predecessor |
| of the block in the CFG. Why then, are we getting the current block when |
| we just set it to ThenBB 5 lines above? The problem is that the "Then" |
| expression may actually itself change the block that the Builder is |
| emitting into if, for example, it contains a nested "if/then/else" |
| expression. Because calling ``codegen()`` recursively could arbitrarily change |
| the notion of the current block, we are required to get an up-to-date |
| value for code that will set up the Phi node. |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| // Emit else block. |
| TheFunction->getBasicBlockList().push_back(ElseBB); |
| Builder.SetInsertPoint(ElseBB); |
| |
| Value *ElseV = Else->codegen(); |
| if (!ElseV) |
| return nullptr; |
| |
| Builder.CreateBr(MergeBB); |
| // codegen of 'Else' can change the current block, update ElseBB for the PHI. |
| ElseBB = Builder.GetInsertBlock(); |
| |
| Code generation for the 'else' block is basically identical to codegen |
| for the 'then' block. The only significant difference is the first line, |
| which adds the 'else' block to the function. Recall previously that the |
| 'else' block was created, but not added to the function. Now that the |
| 'then' and 'else' blocks are emitted, we can finish up with the merge |
| code: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| // Emit merge block. |
| TheFunction->getBasicBlockList().push_back(MergeBB); |
| Builder.SetInsertPoint(MergeBB); |
| PHINode *PN = |
| Builder.CreatePHI(Type::getDoubleTy(TheContext), 2, "iftmp"); |
| |
| PN->addIncoming(ThenV, ThenBB); |
| PN->addIncoming(ElseV, ElseBB); |
| return PN; |
| } |
| |
| The first two lines here are now familiar: the first adds the "merge" |
| block to the Function object (it was previously floating, like the else |
| block above). The second changes the insertion point so that newly |
| created code will go into the "merge" block. Once that is done, we need |
| to create the PHI node and set up the block/value pairs for the PHI. |
| |
| Finally, the CodeGen function returns the phi node as the value computed |
| by the if/then/else expression. In our example above, this returned |
| value will feed into the code for the top-level function, which will |
| create the return instruction. |
| |
| Overall, we now have the ability to execute conditional code in |
| Kaleidoscope. With this extension, Kaleidoscope is a fairly complete |
| language that can calculate a wide variety of numeric functions. Next up |
| we'll add another useful expression that is familiar from non-functional |
| languages... |
| |
| 'for' Loop Expression |
| ===================== |
| |
| Now that we know how to add basic control flow constructs to the |
| language, we have the tools to add more powerful things. Let's add |
| something more aggressive, a 'for' expression: |
| |
| :: |
| |
| extern putchard(char); |
| def printstar(n) |
| for i = 1, i < n, 1.0 in |
| putchard(42); # ascii 42 = '*' |
| |
| # print 100 '*' characters |
| printstar(100); |
| |
| This expression defines a new variable ("i" in this case) which iterates |
| from a starting value, while the condition ("i < n" in this case) is |
| true, incrementing by an optional step value ("1.0" in this case). If |
| the step value is omitted, it defaults to 1.0. While the loop is true, |
| it executes its body expression. Because we don't have anything better |
| to return, we'll just define the loop as always returning 0.0. In the |
| future when we have mutable variables, it will get more useful. |
| |
| As before, let's talk about the changes that we need to Kaleidoscope to |
| support this. |
| |
| Lexer Extensions for the 'for' Loop |
| ----------------------------------- |
| |
| The lexer extensions are the same sort of thing as for if/then/else: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| ... in enum Token ... |
| // control |
| tok_if = -6, tok_then = -7, tok_else = -8, |
| tok_for = -9, tok_in = -10 |
| |
| ... in gettok ... |
| if (IdentifierStr == "def") |
| return tok_def; |
| if (IdentifierStr == "extern") |
| return tok_extern; |
| if (IdentifierStr == "if") |
| return tok_if; |
| if (IdentifierStr == "then") |
| return tok_then; |
| if (IdentifierStr == "else") |
| return tok_else; |
| if (IdentifierStr == "for") |
| return tok_for; |
| if (IdentifierStr == "in") |
| return tok_in; |
| return tok_identifier; |
| |
| AST Extensions for the 'for' Loop |
| --------------------------------- |
| |
| The AST node is just as simple. It basically boils down to capturing the |
| variable name and the constituent expressions in the node. |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| /// ForExprAST - Expression class for for/in. |
| class ForExprAST : public ExprAST { |
| std::string VarName; |
| std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> Start, End, Step, Body; |
| |
| public: |
| ForExprAST(const std::string &VarName, std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> Start, |
| std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> End, std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> Step, |
| std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> Body) |
| : VarName(VarName), Start(std::move(Start)), End(std::move(End)), |
| Step(std::move(Step)), Body(std::move(Body)) {} |
| |
| Value *codegen() override; |
| }; |
| |
| Parser Extensions for the 'for' Loop |
| ------------------------------------ |
| |
| The parser code is also fairly standard. The only interesting thing here |
| is handling of the optional step value. The parser code handles it by |
| checking to see if the second comma is present. If not, it sets the step |
| value to null in the AST node: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| /// forexpr ::= 'for' identifier '=' expr ',' expr (',' expr)? 'in' expression |
| static std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> ParseForExpr() { |
| getNextToken(); // eat the for. |
| |
| if (CurTok != tok_identifier) |
| return LogError("expected identifier after for"); |
| |
| std::string IdName = IdentifierStr; |
| getNextToken(); // eat identifier. |
| |
| if (CurTok != '=') |
| return LogError("expected '=' after for"); |
| getNextToken(); // eat '='. |
| |
| |
| auto Start = ParseExpression(); |
| if (!Start) |
| return nullptr; |
| if (CurTok != ',') |
| return LogError("expected ',' after for start value"); |
| getNextToken(); |
| |
| auto End = ParseExpression(); |
| if (!End) |
| return nullptr; |
| |
| // The step value is optional. |
| std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> Step; |
| if (CurTok == ',') { |
| getNextToken(); |
| Step = ParseExpression(); |
| if (!Step) |
| return nullptr; |
| } |
| |
| if (CurTok != tok_in) |
| return LogError("expected 'in' after for"); |
| getNextToken(); // eat 'in'. |
| |
| auto Body = ParseExpression(); |
| if (!Body) |
| return nullptr; |
| |
| return llvm::make_unique<ForExprAST>(IdName, std::move(Start), |
| std::move(End), std::move(Step), |
| std::move(Body)); |
| } |
| |
| And again we hook it up as a primary expression: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| static std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> ParsePrimary() { |
| switch (CurTok) { |
| default: |
| return LogError("unknown token when expecting an expression"); |
| case tok_identifier: |
| return ParseIdentifierExpr(); |
| case tok_number: |
| return ParseNumberExpr(); |
| case '(': |
| return ParseParenExpr(); |
| case tok_if: |
| return ParseIfExpr(); |
| case tok_for: |
| return ParseForExpr(); |
| } |
| } |
| |
| LLVM IR for the 'for' Loop |
| -------------------------- |
| |
| Now we get to the good part: the LLVM IR we want to generate for this |
| thing. With the simple example above, we get this LLVM IR (note that |
| this dump is generated with optimizations disabled for clarity): |
| |
| .. code-block:: llvm |
| |
| declare double @putchard(double) |
| |
| define double @printstar(double %n) { |
| entry: |
| ; initial value = 1.0 (inlined into phi) |
| br label %loop |
| |
| loop: ; preds = %loop, %entry |
| %i = phi double [ 1.000000e+00, %entry ], [ %nextvar, %loop ] |
| ; body |
| %calltmp = call double @putchard(double 4.200000e+01) |
| ; increment |
| %nextvar = fadd double %i, 1.000000e+00 |
| |
| ; termination test |
| %cmptmp = fcmp ult double %i, %n |
| %booltmp = uitofp i1 %cmptmp to double |
| %loopcond = fcmp one double %booltmp, 0.000000e+00 |
| br i1 %loopcond, label %loop, label %afterloop |
| |
| afterloop: ; preds = %loop |
| ; loop always returns 0.0 |
| ret double 0.000000e+00 |
| } |
| |
| This loop contains all the same constructs we saw before: a phi node, |
| several expressions, and some basic blocks. Let's see how this fits |
| together. |
| |
| Code Generation for the 'for' Loop |
| ---------------------------------- |
| |
| The first part of codegen is very simple: we just output the start |
| expression for the loop value: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| Value *ForExprAST::codegen() { |
| // Emit the start code first, without 'variable' in scope. |
| Value *StartVal = Start->codegen(); |
| if (!StartVal) |
| return nullptr; |
| |
| With this out of the way, the next step is to set up the LLVM basic |
| block for the start of the loop body. In the case above, the whole loop |
| body is one block, but remember that the body code itself could consist |
| of multiple blocks (e.g. if it contains an if/then/else or a for/in |
| expression). |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| // Make the new basic block for the loop header, inserting after current |
| // block. |
| Function *TheFunction = Builder.GetInsertBlock()->getParent(); |
| BasicBlock *PreheaderBB = Builder.GetInsertBlock(); |
| BasicBlock *LoopBB = |
| BasicBlock::Create(TheContext, "loop", TheFunction); |
| |
| // Insert an explicit fall through from the current block to the LoopBB. |
| Builder.CreateBr(LoopBB); |
| |
| This code is similar to what we saw for if/then/else. Because we will |
| need it to create the Phi node, we remember the block that falls through |
| into the loop. Once we have that, we create the actual block that starts |
| the loop and create an unconditional branch for the fall-through between |
| the two blocks. |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| // Start insertion in LoopBB. |
| Builder.SetInsertPoint(LoopBB); |
| |
| // Start the PHI node with an entry for Start. |
| PHINode *Variable = Builder.CreatePHI(Type::getDoubleTy(TheContext), |
| 2, VarName.c_str()); |
| Variable->addIncoming(StartVal, PreheaderBB); |
| |
| Now that the "preheader" for the loop is set up, we switch to emitting |
| code for the loop body. To begin with, we move the insertion point and |
| create the PHI node for the loop induction variable. Since we already |
| know the incoming value for the starting value, we add it to the Phi |
| node. Note that the Phi will eventually get a second value for the |
| backedge, but we can't set it up yet (because it doesn't exist!). |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| // Within the loop, the variable is defined equal to the PHI node. If it |
| // shadows an existing variable, we have to restore it, so save it now. |
| Value *OldVal = NamedValues[VarName]; |
| NamedValues[VarName] = Variable; |
| |
| // Emit the body of the loop. This, like any other expr, can change the |
| // current BB. Note that we ignore the value computed by the body, but don't |
| // allow an error. |
| if (!Body->codegen()) |
| return nullptr; |
| |
| Now the code starts to get more interesting. Our 'for' loop introduces a |
| new variable to the symbol table. This means that our symbol table can |
| now contain either function arguments or loop variables. To handle this, |
| before we codegen the body of the loop, we add the loop variable as the |
| current value for its name. Note that it is possible that there is a |
| variable of the same name in the outer scope. It would be easy to make |
| this an error (emit an error and return null if there is already an |
| entry for VarName) but we choose to allow shadowing of variables. In |
| order to handle this correctly, we remember the Value that we are |
| potentially shadowing in ``OldVal`` (which will be null if there is no |
| shadowed variable). |
| |
| Once the loop variable is set into the symbol table, the code |
| recursively codegen's the body. This allows the body to use the loop |
| variable: any references to it will naturally find it in the symbol |
| table. |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| // Emit the step value. |
| Value *StepVal = nullptr; |
| if (Step) { |
| StepVal = Step->codegen(); |
| if (!StepVal) |
| return nullptr; |
| } else { |
| // If not specified, use 1.0. |
| StepVal = ConstantFP::get(TheContext, APFloat(1.0)); |
| } |
| |
| Value *NextVar = Builder.CreateFAdd(Variable, StepVal, "nextvar"); |
| |
| Now that the body is emitted, we compute the next value of the iteration |
| variable by adding the step value, or 1.0 if it isn't present. |
| '``NextVar``' will be the value of the loop variable on the next |
| iteration of the loop. |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| // Compute the end condition. |
| Value *EndCond = End->codegen(); |
| if (!EndCond) |
| return nullptr; |
| |
| // Convert condition to a bool by comparing non-equal to 0.0. |
| EndCond = Builder.CreateFCmpONE( |
| EndCond, ConstantFP::get(TheContext, APFloat(0.0)), "loopcond"); |
| |
| Finally, we evaluate the exit value of the loop, to determine whether |
| the loop should exit. This mirrors the condition evaluation for the |
| if/then/else statement. |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| // Create the "after loop" block and insert it. |
| BasicBlock *LoopEndBB = Builder.GetInsertBlock(); |
| BasicBlock *AfterBB = |
| BasicBlock::Create(TheContext, "afterloop", TheFunction); |
| |
| // Insert the conditional branch into the end of LoopEndBB. |
| Builder.CreateCondBr(EndCond, LoopBB, AfterBB); |
| |
| // Any new code will be inserted in AfterBB. |
| Builder.SetInsertPoint(AfterBB); |
| |
| With the code for the body of the loop complete, we just need to finish |
| up the control flow for it. This code remembers the end block (for the |
| phi node), then creates the block for the loop exit ("afterloop"). Based |
| on the value of the exit condition, it creates a conditional branch that |
| chooses between executing the loop again and exiting the loop. Any |
| future code is emitted in the "afterloop" block, so it sets the |
| insertion position to it. |
| |
| .. code-block:: c++ |
| |
| // Add a new entry to the PHI node for the backedge. |
| Variable->addIncoming(NextVar, LoopEndBB); |
| |
| // Restore the unshadowed variable. |
| if (OldVal) |
| NamedValues[VarName] = OldVal; |
| else |
| NamedValues.erase(VarName); |
| |
| // for expr always returns 0.0. |
| return Constant::getNullValue(Type::getDoubleTy(TheContext)); |
| } |
| |
| The final code handles various cleanups: now that we have the "NextVar" |
| value, we can add the incoming value to the loop PHI node. After that, |
| we remove the loop variable from the symbol table, so that it isn't in |
| scope after the for loop. Finally, code generation of the for loop |
| always returns 0.0, so that is what we return from |
| ``ForExprAST::codegen()``. |
| |
| With this, we conclude the "adding control flow to Kaleidoscope" chapter |
| of the tutorial. In this chapter we added two control flow constructs, |
| and used them to motivate a couple of aspects of the LLVM IR that are |
| important for front-end implementors to know. In the next chapter of our |
| saga, we will get a bit crazier and add `user-defined |
| operators <LangImpl06.html>`_ to our poor innocent language. |
| |
| Full Code Listing |
| ================= |
| |
| Here is the complete code listing for our running example, enhanced with |
| the if/then/else and for expressions. To build this example, use: |
| |
| .. code-block:: bash |
| |
| # Compile |
| clang++ -g toy.cpp `llvm-config --cxxflags --ldflags --system-libs --libs core mcjit native` -O3 -o toy |
| # Run |
| ./toy |
| |
| Here is the code: |
| |
| .. literalinclude:: ../../examples/Kaleidoscope/Chapter5/toy.cpp |
| :language: c++ |
| |
| `Next: Extending the language: user-defined operators <LangImpl06.html>`_ |
| |