Break out of quantification loop if there is no forward progress #560
Conversation
|
Additional edge cases to consider
|
|
Nice! Does this also resolve #542? |
|
Hmmmm it doesn't right now because we assume quantifications will result in forward progress if the inner node has forward progress, but I guess that isn't true if the quantification has a min-trips of 0. I'll add that case |
| @@ -120,11 +130,15 @@ extension Processor.Registers { | |||
|
|
|||
| self.values = Array( | |||
| repeating: SentinelValue(), count: info.values) | |||
| self.positions = Array( | |||
| repeating: Processor.Registers.sentinelIndex, | |||
| count: info.positions) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Future: Why the start index instead of the provided sentinel? Should or could we construct an invalid index and at least assert that we're never loading that?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
SentinelValue only works on the value registers since they are [Any]. For now we only emit position registers in this one case, if/when we have more complicated cases in the future we'll want some kinda validation like that
| @@ -208,4 +208,40 @@ extension RegexTests { | |||
| expectProgram(for: "[abc]", semanticLevel: .unicodeScalar, doesNotContain: [.matchBitset]) | |||
| expectProgram(for: "[abc]", semanticLevel: .unicodeScalar, contains: [.consumeBy]) | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| func testQuantificationForwardProgressCompile() { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm ok with these for now, but do note that the kinds of tests can become extremely fragile and are likely to get dropped if control flow is ever overhauled. Make sure anything important is represented by both functional tests and more precise unit testing.
E.g. you can test the guaranteesForwardProgress query on regexes, and that wouldn't be fragile.
|
@swift-ci test |
…ftlang#560) This fixes infinite loops when we loop over an internal node that does not have any forward progress. Also included is an optimization to only emit the check/break instructions if we have a case that might result in an infinite loop (possibly non-progressing inner node + unlimited quantification)
…ftlang#560) This fixes infinite loops when we loop over an internal node that does not have any forward progress. Also included is an optimization to only emit the check/break instructions if we have a case that might result in an infinite loop (possibly non-progressing inner node + unlimited quantification)
…ftlang#560) This fixes infinite loops when we loop over an internal node that does not have any forward progress. Also included is an optimization to only emit the check/break instructions if we have a case that might result in an infinite loop (possibly non-progressing inner node + unlimited quantification)
…ftlang#560) This fixes infinite loops when we loop over an internal node that does not have any forward progress. Also included is an optimization to only emit the check/break instructions if we have a case that might result in an infinite loop (possibly non-progressing inner node + unlimited quantification)
…ftlang#560) This fixes infinite loops when we loop over an internal node that does not have any forward progress. Also included is an optimization to only emit the check/break instructions if we have a case that might result in an infinite loop (possibly non-progressing inner node + unlimited quantification)
If we have an inner node of a quantification that doesn't progress our position in the input, we simply loop forever #558
The cases where this can happen range from nefarious (purposefully adding groups around instructions that cannot normally be quantified) to cases that are fairly easy to accidentally hit by making a typo (like the original case in the issue where there was an empty alternation case).
The fix is to add a check to quantification to ensure that our position has progressed, however this comes at a performance cost so this PR also adds an optimization to skip these checks if we can ensure that the inner node will have forward progress
Resolves #558 and resolves #542
rdar://96461197