While preparing PRs like #9753, I've had to change error messages in
dozens of code paths. It would be nice if instead of
EvalError("expected 'boolean' but found '%1%'", showType(v))
we could write
TypeError(v, "boolean")
or similar. Then, changing the error message could be a mechanical
refactor with the compiler pointing out places the constructor needs to
be changed, rather than the error-prone process of grepping through the
codebase. Structured errors would also help prevent the "same" error
from having multiple slightly different messages, and could be a first
step towards error codes / an error index.
This PR reworks the exception infrastructure in `libexpr` to
support exception types with different constructor signatures than
`BaseError`. Actually refactoring the exceptions to use structured data
will come in a future PR (this one is big enough already, as it has to
touch every exception in `libexpr`).
The core design is in `eval-error.hh`. Generally, errors like this:
state.error("'%s' is not a string", getAttrPathStr())
.debugThrow<TypeError>()
are transformed like this:
state.error<TypeError>("'%s' is not a string", getAttrPathStr())
.debugThrow()
The type annotation has moved from `ErrorBuilder::debugThrow` to
`EvalState::error`.
these symbols are used a *lot*, so it makes sense to cache them. this
mostly increases clarity of the code (however clear one may wish to call
the parser desugaring here), but it also provides a small performance
benefit.
there's no reason the parser itself should be doing semantic analysis
like bindVars. split this bit apart (retaining the previous name in
EvalState) and have the parser really do *only* parsing, decoupled from
EvalState.
most instances of this being used do not refer to the "current"
position, sometimes not even to one reasonably close by. it could also
be called `makePos` instead, but `at` seems clear in context.
ParserState better describes what this struct really is. the parser
really does modify its state (most notably position and symbol tables),
so calling it that rather than obliquely "data" (which implies being
input only) makes sense.
