Commit Graph

4 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Dmitry Petrov
da99a100cc Additional constructor call normalization tests 2017-10-30 15:19:13 +03:00
Dmitry Petrov
a89f978597 Provide configurable constructor call normalization
Three modes:

- 'disable' (default): normalize constructor calls in coroutines only
  (required because uninitialized objects can't be stored in fields),
  don't insert additional code for forced class initialization;

- 'enable': normalize constructor calls,
  don't insert additional code for forced class initialization;

- 'preserve-class-initialization': normalize constructor calls,
  insert additional code for forced class initialization.
2017-10-10 08:49:19 +03:00
Dmitry Petrov
7e808bd3ea Add more tests for constructor call evaluation order
- break in arguments
- continue in arguments
- early return in arguments
- non-local return in arguments
- nested constructor call in arguments
2017-10-04 13:39:48 +03:00
Dmitry Petrov
c0a83c3c8a KT-19251 Process uninitialized stores in mandatory bytecode pass
See
https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/KT-19251
https://github.com/puniverse/quasar/issues/280
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8046233

Inline function calls (as well as try/catch expressions) in constructor
arguments produce bytecode that spills stack, and stores uninitialized
objects (created by 'NEW C', but not initialized by 'C.<init>') to
local variables. Such bytecode is valid according to the JVM spec, but
confuses Quasar (and other bytecode postprocessing tools),
and fails to verify under some (buggy) versions of JDK 8.

In order to avoid that, we apply 'processUnitializedStores' already
implemented for coroutines. It moves 'NEW' instructions after the
constructor arguments evaluation, producing code like

<initialize class C using Class.forName>
<evaluate constructor arguments>
<store constructor arguments to variables>
NEW C
DUP
<load constructor arguments from variables>
INVOKESPECIAL C.<init>(...)

NB some other expressions, such as break/continue in the constructor
arguments, also can produce "weird" bytecode: object is created by a
'NEW C' instruction, but later (conditionally) POPped from stack and
left uninitialized. This, as we know, also can screw bytecode
postprocessing. However, it looks like we can get away with it ATM.
Otherwise it looks like we'd have to analyze constructor arguments, see
if the evaluation can "jump out", and perform argument linearization in
codegen.
2017-09-27 12:38:52 +03:00