duskos

commit bd25b5a311d0e9fb99eb88364be986b6b7209baf
parent 27ab1afc6d69bbe3f9aeed87d7e25c522a621a28
Author: Virgil Dupras <hsoft@hardcoded.net>
Date:   Sat,  1 Apr 2023 21:21:18 -0400

halcc: opwidth tests all passing!

no fix necessary!

Diffstat:
M
fs/tests/comp/c/cc.fs
 | 
2
+-
M
fs/tests/comp/c/test2.c
 | 
62
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

2 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/tests/comp/c/cc.fs b/fs/tests/comp/c/cc.fs
@@ -99,7 +99,6 @@ structop5 42 #eq
 structop6 54 #eq
 structop7 42 #eq
 12 42 structop8 54 #eq
-testend \s
 cond2 scnt not # \ don't crash or leak
 opwidth1 42 #eq
 opwidth2 42 #eq
@@ -109,6 +108,7 @@ opwidth5 42 #eq
 opwidth6 1 #eq
 $ff 1 opwidth7 $1fe #eq
 opwidth8 0 #eq
+testend \s
 42 50 ptrari3 46 #eq
 41 value myval
 to' myval ptrari4 not #
diff --git a/fs/tests/comp/c/test2.c b/fs/tests/comp/c/test2.c
@@ -421,3 +421,65 @@ int structop8(int a, int b) {
     return ptr->func(a, b);
 }
 
+// we used to leak VM ops in condition blocks without {}
+void cond1() {
+    int x = 42;
+    if (x==0) x++; else x--;
+}
+
+// Having a return statement in a conditional, if nothing came after it, would
+// prevent the parent from having an implicit return.
+void cond2() { if (0) return; }
+// The forth VM used to assign to the SF in the wrong width
+short opwidth1() {
+    short x = 42;
+    short y = $12345678;
+    return x;
+}
+short opwidth2() {
+    short x = 42;
+    short y = 12;
+    y += $12345678;
+    return x;
+}
+// The i386 VM didn't carry the $100
+int opwidth3() {
+    int x = 42;
+    unsigned char y = $ff;
+    x += y;
+    return x;
+}
+// The Forth VM lost track of opwidth through expressions
+// Forth VM and i386 VM mis-initialized the char array.
+char opwidth4() {
+    char x[2] = {1, 2};
+    int y = 0;
+    x[y] = 12;
+    return x[0] + x[1];
+}
+// The Forth and i386 VMs didn't properly apply size in inc/dec ops
+unsigned char opwidth5() {
+    unsigned char x = 42;
+    unsigned char y = $ff;
+    y++; y--;
+    ++y;
+    return x;
+}
+// The i386 VM always performed "test" on a 4b width
+short opwidth6() {
+    short x = 42;
+    short y = 0;
+    if (y) return 0; else return 1;
+}
+// The i386 VM didn't properly promote "a" to int
+int opwidth7(char a, int b) {
+	return a << b;
+}
+// Under i386, integer promotion of a non-reg operand would result in a buggy
+// operation because we would read too much information from memory.
+int opwidth8() {
+	int x = 54;
+	globdata.baz[0] = 42;
+	globdata.baz[1] = 1;
+	return x < globdata.baz[0];
+}