Skip to content

Conversation

ggiraldez
Copy link
Contributor

  • For Yul variables, we were binding to the YulVariableDeclarationStatement, but that's incorrect because they can enumerate many variables. We now bind to the variable name itself.
  • For tuple deconstruction declarations, we now bind to the tuple member variant. In practical terms this is a minor change, but it's convenient as the TupleMember is typed as an enum when building an AST, and we don't save the node ID for it.

- For Yul variables, we were binding to the statement, but that's incorrect
because a Yul variable declaration statement can enumerate many variables; we
now bind to the variable name itself
- For tuple deconstruction declarations, we now bind to the tuple member
variant; in practical terms this is not a change from before, but it allows us
to compare with the new binder that can't register definitions to choice
types (because they are modelled as enums that don't register the node ID)
Copy link

changeset-bot bot commented May 14, 2025

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: 4f879a2

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Name Type
@nomicfoundation/slang Patch

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

@ggiraldez ggiraldez marked this pull request as ready for review May 14, 2025 23:01
@ggiraldez ggiraldez requested review from a team as code owners May 14, 2025 23:01
@@ -1853,7 +1853,7 @@ inherit .star_extension

@tuple_decon [TupleDeconstructionStatement [TupleDeconstructionElements
[TupleDeconstructionElement
@tuple_member [TupleMember variant: [UntypedTupleMember
[TupleMember @tuple_member variant: [UntypedTupleMember
@name name: [Identifier]]
]
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

unrelated to this PR:
I was confused for a second by node_definition and definiens_node.
Since we decided to rename the public API to use name_location and definiens_location, I wonder if we should use that here as well?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That's true. The attribute names were inherited from stack graph's supported languages and the terms they use. But we may want to change them.

@ggiraldez ggiraldez added this pull request to the merge queue May 23, 2025
Merged via the queue into NomicFoundation:main with commit 045179b May 23, 2025
2 checks passed
@ggiraldez ggiraldez deleted the binding-rules-fix branch May 23, 2025 12:50
@github-actions github-actions bot mentioned this pull request May 23, 2025
OmarTawfik added a commit that referenced this pull request May 23, 2025
Fixes a minor formatting issue from #1326; turns out lists need to start with a leading line to be rendered correctly (see repro in #1332).
github-merge-queue bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 26, 2025
Fixes a minor formatting issue from my earlier suggestion in
#1326 (comment).
It turns out lists need to start with a leading line to be rendered
correctly (see repro in #1332).
cc @ggiraldez
github-merge-queue bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 21, 2025
This PR was opened by the [Changesets
release](https://github.com/changesets/action) GitHub action. When
you're ready to do a release, you can merge this and publish to npm
yourself or [setup this action to publish
automatically](https://github.com/changesets/action#with-publishing). If
you're not ready to do a release yet, that's fine, whenever you add more
changesets to main, this PR will be updated.


# Releases
## @nomicfoundation/slang@1.2.1

### Patch Changes

- [#1377](#1377)
[`f3b51be`](f3b51be)
Thanks [@ggiraldez](https://github.com/ggiraldez)! - Bind untyped tuple
deconstruction elements as references, not declarations

- [#1335](#1335)
[`6c3ad5d`](6c3ad5d)
Thanks [@ggiraldez](https://github.com/ggiraldez)! - Top-level
`ConstantDefinition`s now bind to their type and resolve extension
functions called on them

- [#1338](#1338)
[`18be0bc`](18be0bc)
Thanks [@ggiraldez](https://github.com/ggiraldez)! - Make try/catch
parameters and vars in for loop initialization available in Yul

- [#1339](#1339)
[`f16e4b5`](f16e4b5)
Thanks [@ggiraldez](https://github.com/ggiraldez)! - Fixes to the
binding rules in Solidity:

- Make the `.length` member available in all static-size byte arrays
- Allow assembly blocks (and nested Yul functions) to access inherited
state variables
- Allow assembly blocks access to constructor/modifier/fallback
parameters
    -   `msg.sender` is of `address` type (not `payable`) until 0.5.0
- Top-level constants need to be visible from assembly blocks in files
that import them
    -   Resolve named arguments when calling an extension function
- Imported symbols using deconstruction syntax can be bound in assembly
blocks

- [#1353](#1353)
[`8e718dd`](8e718dd)
Thanks [@ggiraldez](https://github.com/ggiraldez)! - Fixes to the
binding rules in Solidity:

- Values of the deprecated `byte` type have a `length` member until
0.8.0
- Bind a qualified identifier in the same contract, ie. `Foo.x` in a
method body of `Foo`
- Correctly bind external constants and built-ins in nested functions in
assembly blocks
- Literal boolean values should bind to the `bool` type to chain
extension functions
- Public state variables the generate getters should have members of
external functions (such as `.selector`)
    -   Event types have a `selector` member

- [#1326](#1326)
[`045179b`](045179b)
Thanks [@ggiraldez](https://github.com/ggiraldez)! - Fixes to binding
rules:

- Update `TupleDeconstructionStatement` so that their definiens is the
`TypedTupleMember`/`UntypedTupleMember` for each variable declared.
- Update `YulVariableDeclarationStatement` so that their definiens is
the `YulIdentifier` for each variable declared.

- [#1350](#1350)
[`0594fe8`](0594fe8)
Thanks [@ggiraldez](https://github.com/ggiraldez)! - Fixes to bindings
rules in Solidity:

- Allow binding of `using` directives inside interfaces in Solidity <
0.7.1
    -   Bind literal fixed arrays types
- Fix generating binding graph for built-ins: remove the `memory`
location specifier from types so they bind properly
- Fix return type of `value()` and `gas()` legacy call options to allow
chaining them
    -   Bind legacy call options in the result of `new` expressions
- Bind output type of public getters when the state variable is a nested
mapping or array
- A `using` directive with the `global` modifier should impact the
source unit's lexical scope
- Relax the Solidity version where the `transfer()` method works for
non-payable addresses; this is a workaround for a Solidity quirk that
makes it possible to do `address(uint160(to)).transfer(amount)` even
after 0.5.0
- Fix bound return types of `wrap()` and `unwrap()` methods of a user
value defined type
- Resolve the type of `min()` and `max()` of `type()` expressions for
integer types to the integer type given in the expression operand
    -   Fix binding of fully qualified modifier invocations
- Fix #1321: `min()` and `max()` for `type()` expressions on `enum`
types should bind only after Solidity 0.8.8
- Bound type for literal number expressions is `uint256` by default;
this allows correctly binding extension methods operating on literal
values
- The type `bytes` is an array type and should bind the `push()` and
`pop()` methods
- Contract or interface reference values implicitly inherit from the
`address` type on Solidity < 0.5.0
- Modifiers are allowed inside interfaces until Solidity 0.8.8 and thus
should properly bind and be accessible from inheriting contracts
- Libraries before Solidity 0.5.0 allowed `this` in function methods and
work as an `address` type

Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants