Jared (Jan 23 2024 at 16:45): Jared (Jan 23 2024 at 16:45):It looks like some compiler things have changed since it was written (https://github.com/roc-lang/roc/pull/5120/files), and now the bridge.c is referencing undefined symbols.
Jared (Jan 23 2024 at 16:46):The symbols it's looking for are
roc__programForHost_1__InterpolateString_caller
roc__programForHost_1__MulArrByScalar_caller
roc__programForHost_1__Factorial_caller
but the ones that show up in the impl.o are
0000000000003948 T _roc__programForHost_0_caller
0000000000003978 T _roc__programForHost_0_result_size
0000000000003988 T _roc__programForHost_0_size
0000000000003990 T _roc__programForHost_1_caller
0000000000003888 T _roc__programForHost_1_exposed
0000000000003878 T _roc__programForHost_1_exposed_generic
0000000000003898 T _roc__programForHost_1_exposed_size
00000000000039d8 T _roc__programForHost_1_result_size
00000000000039e8 T _roc__programForHost_1_size
00000000000039f0 T _roc__programForHost_2_caller
0000000000003a30 T _roc__programForHost_2_result_size
0000000000003a40 T _roc__programForHost_2_size
Is there a compiler flag I'm missing to get the function names added to the linker symbols?
Brendan Hansknecht (Jan 23 2024 at 16:50):Yeah....I think names were lost at some point. Not sure why.
Brendan Hansknecht (Jan 23 2024 at 16:50):Also, not sure if we have a bug filed for it or not
Brendan Hansknecht (Jan 23 2024 at 16:50):@Folkert de Vries I assume it was a glue related change that caused this. Any ideas?
Folkert de Vries (Jan 23 2024 at 18:47):No. I guess we updated all other platforms to not rely on the names?
Jared (Jan 23 2024 at 19:53):So do I just use 0_caller, 1_caller, and 2_caller for the three functions that get exported? (I tried that, and got ILLEGAL INSTRUCTION when trying to execute)
Folkert de Vries (Jan 23 2024 at 19:54):they could be in an arbitrary order
Jared (Jan 23 2024 at 19:56)::grimacing: oh that's exciting. Any tips on how to proceed?
Jared (Jan 23 2024 at 19:57):Is exporting multiple functions just not well supported anymore?
Folkert de Vries (Jan 23 2024 at 19:58):it never was really, I'm not really sure why this was attempted here. so, one thing you can do is look at teh LLVM IR and guess. or the info should be available in the compiler somewhere, I'm looking
Brendan Hansknecht (Jan 23 2024 at 19:59):Yeah, we really need to get rid of this record of closures thing and allow exporting multiple functions.
Folkert de Vries (Jan 23 2024 at 20:02):so we have this function
fn build_closure_caller<'a, 'ctx>(
env: &Env<'a, 'ctx, '_>,
layout_interner: &STLayoutInterner<'a>,
def_name: &str,
evaluator: FunctionValue<'ctx>,
alias_symbol: Symbol,
arguments: &[InLayout<'a>],
return_layout: InLayout<'a>,
lambda_set: LambdaSet<'a>,
result: InLayout<'a>,
) {
I suspect the alias_symbol is the name of the alias?
Brendan Hansknecht (Jan 23 2024 at 20:34):Was broken during this PR: https://github.com/roc-lang/roc/pull/5093
Sadly didn't manage to narrow to a specific commit. Instead have about 10:
Brendan Hansknecht (Jan 23 2024 at 20:51):Updated how I was testing for bisect to avoid a different error. Now I have a first failing commit:
https://github.com/roc-lang/roc/commit/769a4c415b04a12f88e75cefdea7b135c9dbbb5f
Brendan Hansknecht (Jan 23 2024 at 20:52):Oh yeah, literally just pulled out the feature: https://github.com/roc-lang/roc/commit/769a4c415b04a12f88e75cefdea7b135c9dbbb5f#diff-cdbf72af96e45146eca8f0477d9181a0ca3d64f2d134a3ecb7503af3352b1a17L5211-L5236
Folkert de Vries (Jan 23 2024 at 20:54):yeah the thing is that these names need to link up with what glue generates/expects
Folkert de Vries (Jan 23 2024 at 20:54):that is hard because in general we don't have a name for that thing. Especially now that we've dropped the as Fx syntax that symbol name is actually not guaranteed to be meaningful
Brendan Hansknecht (Jan 23 2024 at 20:55):Especially now that we've dropped the as Fx syntax
The syntax still is valid and parses. Maybe that is the root of the confusion?
Brendan Hansknecht (Jan 23 2024 at 20:56):We probably should fully remove it if it is no longer supported
Folkert de Vries (Jan 23 2024 at 20:57):no, it's a way to define inline aliases, so the alias still works
Folkert de Vries (Jan 23 2024 at 20:57):it's just no longer meaningful for generating names
Brendan Hansknecht (Jan 23 2024 at 20:59):Oh, so that can be used to work around our recursive type bug? You can use a inline alias instead of trying to define to mutually recursive aliases?
Brendan Hansknecht (Jan 23 2024 at 21:00):I guess I never realized that feature was used for more. I thought it was just for the glue naming
Folkert de Vries (Jan 23 2024 at 21:00):not sure what you mean? you can write
x : [ Cons a (ConsList a), Nil ] as ConsList a
x = Nil
Why is that a feature? It is just to skip this line?
ConsList a : [ Cons a (ConsList a), Nil ]
Also, I was mentioning that currently it can be used to work around this bug:
Program : List Term
Term : [Quote Program]
── CYCLIC ALIAS ──────────────────────────────────────────────── /tmp/impl.roc ─
The Program alias is self-recursive in an invalid way:
6│ Program : List Term
^^^^^^^
Recursion in aliases is only allowed if recursion happens behind a
tagged union, at least one variant of which is not recursive.
────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Cause this works:
Term : [Quote ((List Term) as Program)]
That said, I don't think that is really a reason for the feature to exist. It is just a case where it can happen to work around a compiler bug.
Folkert de Vries (Jan 23 2024 at 21:31):well the general idea is that you should be able to type any value without resorting to an alias defined outside of the type itself
Folkert de Vries (Jan 23 2024 at 21:31):if an alias is an alias, we should always be able to inline the alias,right
Brendan Hansknecht (Jan 23 2024 at 21:33):ah
Brendan Hansknecht (Jan 23 2024 at 21:34):That makes sense
Brendan Hansknecht (Jan 23 2024 at 21:34):Just feels weird to have two ways to do the same thing kinda. But I get the use now.
Jared (Jan 24 2024 at 03:33):Is there a tutorial anywhere about platform glue?
Brendan Hansknecht (Jan 24 2024 at 03:38):Not really. Glue currently can only autogenerate for rust (and to a more limited extent zig).
Brendan Hansknecht (Jan 24 2024 at 03:38):So currently, it is mostly bespoke knowledge and learned by asking question.
Brendan Hansknecht (Jan 24 2024 at 03:39):It is currently an actively moving target with some larger changes planned, which is why it hasn't really be documented currently.
Notification Bot (Jan 24 2024 at 08:40):Fabian Schmalzried has marked this topic as resolved.
Notification Bot (Jan 24 2024 at 08:40):Fabian Schmalzried has marked this topic as unresolved.
Last updated: Jul 06 2025 at 12:14 UTC