[compiler] Correctly infer context mutation places as outer (context) places #33114
+21
−24
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
… places The issue in the previous PR was due to a ContextMutation function effect having a place that wasn't one of the functions' context variables. What was happening is that the `getContextRefOperand()` helper wasn't following aliases. If an operand had a context type, we recorded the operand as the context place — but instead we should be looking through to the context places of the abstract value. With this change the fixture now fails for a different reason — we infer this as a mutation of `params` and reject it because `params` is frozen (hook return value). This case is clearly a false positive: the mutation is on the outer, new `nextParams` object and can't possibly mutate `params`. Need to think more about what to do here but this is clearly more precise in terms of which variable we record as the context variable. [ghstack-poisoned]
josephsavona
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 3, 2025
… places The issue in the previous PR was due to a ContextMutation function effect having a place that wasn't one of the functions' context variables. What was happening is that the `getContextRefOperand()` helper wasn't following aliases. If an operand had a context type, we recorded the operand as the context place — but instead we should be looking through to the context places of the abstract value. With this change the fixture now fails for a different reason — we infer this as a mutation of `params` and reject it because `params` is frozen (hook return value). This case is clearly a false positive: the mutation is on the outer, new `nextParams` object and can't possibly mutate `params`. Need to think more about what to do here but this is clearly more precise in terms of which variable we record as the context variable. ghstack-source-id: 55f5aa0a696d23f210f5abd8476c46b444f44615 Pull Request resolved: #33114
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Stack from ghstack (oldest at bottom):
The issue in the previous PR was due to a ContextMutation function effect having a place that wasn't one of the functions' context variables. What was happening is that the
getContextRefOperand()helper wasn't following aliases. If an operand had a context type, we recorded the operand as the context place — but instead we should be looking through to the context places of the abstract value.With this change the fixture now fails for a different reason — we infer this as a mutation of
paramsand reject it becauseparamsis frozen (hook return value). This case is clearly a false positive: the mutation is on the outer, newnextParamsobject and can't possibly mutateparams. Need to think more about what to do here but this is clearly more precise in terms of which variable we record as the context variable.