Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects
Commit 05f35ec5 authored by Alastair Reid's avatar Alastair Reid
Browse files

[project @ 1998-05-19 16:47:43 by reid] 

Added first draft of coding style doc
parent 2b90fe5a
No related merge requests found
Hide whitespace changes
Inline Side-by-side
Showing
with 484 additions and 0 deletions
docs/coding-style.html 0 → 100644
+ 484
− 0
View file @ 05f35ec5
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Access To The GHC CVS Repository</TITLE>
<META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="Mozilla/3.04Gold (X11; I; SunOS 5.5.1 i86pc) [Netscape]">
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<H1>Coding suggestions for GHC/Hugs related code</h1>
<h2>Comments</h2>
NB These are just suggestions. They're not set in stone. Some of
them are probably misguided. If you disagree with them, feel free to
modify this document (and make your commit message reasonably informative)
or mail someone (eg <a href="fp-cvs-fptools@dcs.gla.ac.uk">The FP-CVS mailing list</a> or
<a
href="mailto:reid-alastair@cs.yale.edu">reid-alastair@cs.yale.edu</a>).
<h2>References</h2>
If you haven't read them already, you might like to check the following.
Where they conflict with our suggestions, they're probably right.
<ul>
<li>
Writing Solid Code, Microsoft Press. (Highly recommended. Possibly
the only Microsoft Press book that's worth reading. SimonPJ has a
copy.)
<li>
Autoconf documentation (which doesn't seem to be on the web).
See also <a href="http://peti.gmd.de/autoconf-archive/">The autoconf macro archive</a> and
<a href="http://www.cyclic.com/cyclic-pages/autoconf.html">Cyclic Software's description</a>
<li>
<a href="http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/cml/cstyle/indhill-cstyle.html">Indian Hill C Style and Coding Standards</a>.
<li>
<a href="http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/cml/cstyle/">A list of C programming style links</a>
<li>
<a href="http://www.lysator.liu.se/c/c-www.html">A very large list of C programming links</a>
<li>
<a href="http://www.geek-girl.com/unix.html">A list of Unix programming links</a>
</ul>
<h2>Portability issues</h2>
<ul>
<li>
We use ANSI C with some extensions. In particular, we use:
<ul>
<li>enum
<li>ANSI style prototypes
<li>#elsif, #error, #warning, ## and other cpp features
</ul>
<li>
We use the following gcc extensions (see gcc documentation):
<ul>
<li>zero length arrays (useful as the last field of a struct)
<li>inline annotations on functions (see later)
<li>Labeled elements in initialisers
<li>Function attributes (mostly just no_return)
<li>Macro varargs (actually, we don't use them yet but I'm very tempted)
<li>Alastair really likes to use C++ style comments - but
he'll probably regret it later.
<li>other stuff I've forgotten about...
</ul>
Some of these gcc/ANSI features could be avoided (for example, we
could use __inline__ instead of inline or use the usual PROTO((...))
trick in function prototypes) - but some of them can't be avoided
so we don't try with the others.
<li>
char can be signed or unsigned - always say which you mean
<li>
Some architectures have memory alignment constraints.
Others don't have any constraints but go faster if you align things.
These macros tell you which alignment to use
<pre>
/* minimum alignment of unsigned int */
#define ALIGNMENT_UNSIGNED_INT 4
/* minimum alignment of long */
#define ALIGNMENT_LONG 4
/* minimum alignment of float */
#define ALIGNMENT_FLOAT 4
/* minimum alignment of double */
#define ALIGNMENT_DOUBLE 4
</pre>
<li>
Use StgInt, StgWord and StgPtr when reading/writing ints and ptrs to
the stack or heap. Note that, by definition, StgInt, StgWord and
StgPtr are the same size and have the same alignment constraints
even if sizeof(int) != sizeof(ptr) on that platform.
<li>
Use StgInt8, StgInt16, etc when you need a certain minimum number of
bits in a type. Use int and nat when there's no particular
constraint. ANSI C only guarantees that ints are at least 16 bits but
within GHC we assume they are 32 bits. (I'm not sure if this is a
good idea - ADR)
<li>
Use StgFloat and StgDouble for floating point values which will go
on/have come from the stack or heap. Note that StgFloat may be the
same as StgDouble on some architectures (eg Alphas) and that it might
occupy many StgWords.
<p>
Use PK_FLT(addr), PK_DBL(addr) to read StgFloat and
StgDouble values from the stack/heap, and ASSIGN_FLT(val,addr)/
ASSIGN_DBL(val,addr) to assign StgFloat/StgDouble values to heap/stack
locations. These macros take care of alignment restrictions.
<p>
Heap/Stack locations are StgWord aligned; the alignment requirements
of an StgDouble may be more than that of StgWord, but we don't pad
misaligned StgDoubles (doing so would be too much hassle).
<p>
Doing a direct assignment/read of an StgDouble to/from a mis-aligned
location may not work, so we use the ASSIGN_DBL(,)/PK_DBL() macro,
which goes via a temporary.
<p>
Problem: if the architecture allows mis-aligned accesses, but prefers
aligned accesses, these macros just add an extra level of indirection.
We need to distinguish between an architecture that allows mis-aligned
accesses and one that just imposes a performance penalty (this is most
of them). Perhaps have PREFERRED_ALIGNMENT and REQUIRED_ALIGMENT
configurations?
<li>
Avoid conditional code like this:
<pre>
#ifdef solaris_HOST_OS
// do something solaris specific
#endif
</pre>
Instead, add an appropriate test to the configure.in script and use
the result of that test instead.
<pre>
#ifdef HAVE_BSD_H
// use a BSD library
#endif
</pre>
The problem is that things change from one version of an OS to another
- things get added, things get deleted, things get broken, some things
are optional extras. Using "feature tests" instead of "system tests"
makes things a lot less brittle. Things also tend to get documented
better.
</ul>
<h2>Debugging/robustness tricks</h2>
Anyone who has tried to debug a garbage collector or code generator
will tell you: "If a program is going to crash, it should crash as
soon, as noisily and as often as possible." There's nothing worse
than trying to find a bug which only shows up when running GHC on
itself and doesn't manifest itself until 10 seconds after the actual
cause of the problem.
<p>
The ideas in this section are mostly aimed at this issue:
<ul>
<li>
Use assertions. Use lots of assertions. If you write a comment
that says "takes a +ve number" add an assertion. If you're casting
an int to a nat, add an assertion. If you're casting an int to a char,
add an assertion.
<li>
When defining an enumeration, it's a good idea not to use 0 for normal
values. Instead, make 0 raise an internal error. The idea here is to
make it easier to detect pointer-related errors on the assumption that
random pointers are more likely to point to a 0 than to anything else.
<pre>
typedef enum
{ i_INTERNAL_ERROR /* Instruction 0 raises an internal error */
, i_PANIC /* irrefutable pattern match failed! */
, i_ERROR /* user level error */
...
</pre>
<li> Use #warning or #error whenever you write a piece of incomplete/broken code.
</ul>
<h2>Syntactic details</h2>
<ul>
<li><b>Important:</b> Put "redundant" braces or parens in your code.
Omitting braces and parens leads to very hard to spot bugs -
especially if you use macros (and you might have noticed that GHC does
this a lot!)
<p>
In particular:
<ul>
<li>
Put braces round the body of for loops, while loops, if statements, etc.
even if they "aren't needed" because it's really hard to find the resulting
bug if you mess up. Indent them any way you like but put them in there!
<li>
When defining a macro, always put parens round args - just in case.
For example, write:
<pre>
#define add(x,y) ((x)+(y))
</pre>
instead of
<pre>
#define add(x,y) x+y
</pre>
<li>
Don't define macros that expand to a list of statements.
You could just use braces as in:
<pre>
#define ASSIGN_CC_ID(ccID) \
{ \
ccID = CC_ID; \
CC_ID++; \
}
</pre>
but it's better to use the "do { ... } while (0)" trick instead:
<pre>
#define ASSIGN_CC_ID(ccID) \
do { \
ccID = CC_ID; \
CC_ID++; \
} while(0)
</pre>
The following explanation comes from
<a href="http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/cml/cstyle/code-std-disc.txt">The Usenet C programming FAQ</a>
<pre>
10.4: What's the best way to write a multi-statement macro?
A: The usual goal is to write a macro that can be invoked as if it
were a statement consisting of a single function call. This
means that the "caller" will be supplying the final semicolon,
so the macro body should not. The macro body cannot therefore
be a simple brace-enclosed compound statement, because syntax
errors would result if it were invoked (apparently as a single
statement, but with a resultant extra semicolon) as the if
branch of an if/else statement with an explicit else clause.
The traditional solution, therefore, is to use
#define MACRO(arg1, arg2) do { \
/* declarations */ \
stmt1; \
stmt2; \
/* ... */ \
} while(0) /* (no trailing ; ) */
When the caller appends a semicolon, this expansion becomes a
single statement regardless of context. (An optimizing compiler
will remove any "dead" tests or branches on the constant
condition 0, although lint may complain.)
If all of the statements in the intended macro are simple
expressions, with no declarations or loops, another technique is
to write a single, parenthesized expression using one or more
comma operators. (For an example, see the first DEBUG() macro
in question 10.26.) This technique also allows a value to be
"returned."
References: H&S Sec. 3.3.2 p. 45; CT&P Sec. 6.3 pp. 82-3.
</pre>
<li>
Don't even write macros that expand to 0 statements - they can mess you
up as well. Use the doNothing macro instead.
<pre>
#define doNothing() do { } while (0)
</pre>
</ul>
<li>
Use inline functions instead of macros if possible - they're a lot
less tricky to get right and don't suffer from the usual problems
of side effects, evaluation order, multiple evaluation, etc.
<ul>
<li>Inline functions get the naming issue right. E.g. they
can have local variables which (in an expression context)
macros can't.
<li> Inline functions have call-by-value semantics whereas macros
are call-by-name. You can be bitten by duplicated computation
if you aren't careful.
</ul>
However, note that macros can serve as both l-values and r-values and
can be "polymorphic" as these examples show:
<pre>
// you can use this as an l-value or an l-value
#define PROF_INFO(cl) (((StgClosure*)(cl))->header.profInfo)
// polymorphic case
// but note that min(min(1,2),3) does 3 comparisions instead of 2!!
#define min(x,y) (((x)<=(y)) ? (x) : (y))
</pre>
<li>
Inline functions should be "static inline" because:
<ul>
<li>
gcc will delete static inlines if not used or theyre always inlined.
<li>
if they're externed, we could get conflicts between 2 copies of the
same function if, for some reason, gcc is unable to delete them.
If they're static, we still get multiple copies but at least they don't conflict.
</ul>
OTOH, the gcc manual says this
so maybe we should use extern inline?
<pre>
When a function is both inline and `static', if all calls to the
function are integrated into the caller, and the function's address is
never used, then the function's own assembler code is never referenced.
In this case, GNU CC does not actually output assembler code for the
function, unless you specify the option `-fkeep-inline-functions'.
Some calls cannot be integrated for various reasons (in particular,
calls that precede the function's definition cannot be integrated, and
neither can recursive calls within the definition). If there is a
nonintegrated call, then the function is compiled to assembler code as
usual. The function must also be compiled as usual if the program
refers to its address, because that can't be inlined.
When an inline function is not `static', then the compiler must
assume that there may be calls from other source files; since a global
symbol can be defined only once in any program, the function must not
be defined in the other source files, so the calls therein cannot be
integrated. Therefore, a non-`static' inline function is always
compiled on its own in the usual fashion.
If you specify both `inline' and `extern' in the function
definition, then the definition is used only for inlining. In no case
is the function compiled on its own, not even if you refer to its
address explicitly. Such an address becomes an external reference, as
if you had only declared the function, and had not defined it.
This combination of `inline' and `extern' has almost the effect of a
macro. The way to use it is to put a function definition in a header
file with these keywords, and put another copy of the definition
(lacking `inline' and `extern') in a library file. The definition in
the header file will cause most calls to the function to be inlined.
If any uses of the function remain, they will refer to the single copy
in the library.
</pre>
<li>
Try to use ANSI C's enum feature when defining lists of constants of the
same type. You'll notice that gdb works better when you do this.
For example:
<pre>
typedef enum { /* N.B. Used as indexes into arrays */
NO_HEAP_PROFILING,
HEAP_BY_CC,
HEAP_BY_MOD,
HEAP_BY_GRP,
HEAP_BY_DESCR,
HEAP_BY_TYPE,
HEAP_BY_TIME
} ProfilingFlags;
</pre>
instead of
<pre>
# define NO_HEAP_PROFILING 0 /* N.B. Used as indexes into arrays */
# define HEAP_BY_CC 1
# define HEAP_BY_MOD 2
# define HEAP_BY_GRP 3
# define HEAP_BY_DESCR 4
# define HEAP_BY_TYPE 5
# define HEAP_BY_TIME 6
</pre>
and
<pre>
typedef enum {
CCchar = 'C',
MODchar = 'M',
GRPchar = 'G',
DESCRchar = 'D',
TYPEchar = 'Y',
TIMEchar = 'T'
} ProfilingTag;
</pre>
instead of
<pre>
# define CCchar 'C'
# define MODchar 'M'
# define GRPchar 'G'
# define DESCRchar 'D'
# define TYPEchar 'Y'
# define TIMEchar 'T'
</pre>
ToDo: at the time of writing, we still use the former.
<li>
Alastair likes to use stgCast instead of C syntax. He claims
it's easier to write and easier to grep for. YMMV.
<pre>
#define stgCast(ty,e) ((ty)(e))
</pre>
<li> We don't care too much about your indentation style but, if
you're modifying a function, please try to use the same style as the
rest of the function (or file).
<p>
On which note:
Hugs related pieces of code often start with the line:
<pre>
/* -*- mode: hugs-c; -*- */
</pre>
which helps Emacs mimic the indentation style used by Mark P Jones
within Hugs. Add this to your .emacs file.
<pre>
(defun hugs-c-mode ()
"C mode with adjusted defaults for use with Hugs (based on linux-c-mode)"
(interactive)
(c-mode)
(setq c-basic-offset 4)
(setq indent-tabs-mode nil) ; don't use tabs to indent
(setq c-recognize-knr-r nil) ; no K&R here - don't pay the price
; no: (setq tab-width 4)
(c-set-offset 'knr-argdecl-intro 0)
(c-set-offset 'case-label 0)
(c-set-offset 'statement-case-intro '++)
(c-set-offset 'statement-case-open '+)
)
</pre>
</ul>
<h2>CVS issues</h2>
<ul>
<li>
Don't be tempted to reindent or reorganise large chunks of code - it
generates large diffs in which it's hard to see whether anything else
was changed.
<p>
If you must reindent or reorganise, don't do anything else in that commit
and give advance warning that you're about to do it in case anyone else
is changing that file.
</ul>
</body>
</html>
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment