Fix for the issue in the previous PR. Long-term the ideal thing would be to make InferMutableRanges smarter about Store effects, and recognize that they are also transitive mutations of whatever was captured into the object. So in the following:
```
const x = {y: {z: {}}};
x.y.z.key = value;
```
That the `PropertyStore z . 'key' = value` is a transitive mutation of x and all three object expressions (x, x.y, x.y.z).
But for now it's simpler to stick to the original idea of Store only counting if we know that the type is an object.
[ghstack-poisoned]
Fix for the issue in the previous PR. Long-term the ideal thing would be to make InferMutableRanges smarter about Store effects, and recognize that they are also transitive mutations of whatever was captured into the object. So in the following:
```
const x = {y: {z: {}}};
x.y.z.key = value;
```
That the `PropertyStore z . 'key' = value` is a transitive mutation of x and all three object expressions (x, x.y, x.y.z).
But for now it's simpler to stick to the original idea of Store only counting if we know that the type is an object.
[ghstack-poisoned]
Fix for the issue in the previous PR. Long-term the ideal thing would be to make InferMutableRanges smarter about Store effects, and recognize that they are also transitive mutations of whatever was captured into the object. So in the following:
```
const x = {y: {z: {}}};
x.y.z.key = value;
```
That the `PropertyStore z . 'key' = value` is a transitive mutation of x and all three object expressions (x, x.y, x.y.z).
But for now it's simpler to stick to the original idea of Store only counting if we know that the type is an object.
[ghstack-poisoned]
Fix for the issue in the previous PR. Long-term the ideal thing would be to make InferMutableRanges smarter about Store effects, and recognize that they are also transitive mutations of whatever was captured into the object. So in the following:
```
const x = {y: {z: {}}};
x.y.z.key = value;
```
That the `PropertyStore z . 'key' = value` is a transitive mutation of x and all three object expressions (x, x.y, x.y.z).
But for now it's simpler to stick to the original idea of Store only counting if we know that the type is an object.
[ghstack-poisoned]
Fix for the issue in the previous PR. Long-term the ideal thing would be to make InferMutableRanges smarter about Store effects, and recognize that they are also transitive mutations of whatever was captured into the object. So in the following:
```
const x = {y: {z: {}}};
x.y.z.key = value;
```
That the `PropertyStore z . 'key' = value` is a transitive mutation of x and all three object expressions (x, x.y, x.y.z).
But for now it's simpler to stick to the original idea of Store only counting if we know that the type is an object.
[ghstack-poisoned]
Adds fixture tests to demonstrate an issue in changing PropertyStore to always have a Store effect on its object operand, regardless of the operand type. The issue is that if we're doing a PropertyStore on a nested value, that has be considered a transitive mutation of the parent object:
```
const x = {y: {z: {}}};
x.y.z.key = 'value'; // this has to be a mutation of `x`
```
Fix in the next PR.
[ghstack-poisoned]
React Compiler's program traversal logic is pretty lengthy and complex
as we've added a lot of features piecemeal. `compileProgram` is 300+
lines long and has confusing control flow (defining helpers inline,
invoking visitors, mutating-asts-while-iterating, mutating global
`ALREADY_COMPILED` state).
- Moved more stuff to `ProgramContext`
- Separated `compileProgram` into a bunch of helpers
Tested by syncing this stack to a Meta codebase and observing no
compilation output changes (D74487851, P1806855669, P1806855379)
---
[//]: # (BEGIN SAPLING FOOTER)
Stack created with [Sapling](https://sapling-scm.com). Best reviewed
with [ReviewStack](https://reviewstack.dev/facebook/react/pull/33147).
* #33149
* #33148
* __->__ #33147
We've occassionally added logic that extends mutable ranges into InferReactiveScopeVariables to handle a specific case, but inevitably discover that the logic needs to be part of the InferMutableRanges fixpoint loop. That happened in the past with extending the range of phi operands to account for subsequent mutations, which I moved to InferMutableRanges a while back. But InferReactiveScopeVariables also has logic to group co-mutations in the same scope, which also extends ranges of the co-mutating operands to have the same end point. Recently mofeiz found some cases where this is insufficient, where a closure captures a value that could change via a co-mutation, and where failure to extend the ranges in the fixpoint meant the function expression appeared independently memoizable when it wasn't.
The fix is to make InferMutableRanges update ranges to account for co-mutations. That is relatively straightforward, but not enough! The problem is that the fixpoint loop stopped once the alias sets coalesced, but co-mutations only affect ranges and not aliases. So the other part of the fix is to have the fixpoint condition use a custom canonicalization that describes each identifiers root _and_ the mutable range of that root.
[ghstack-poisoned]
We've occassionally added logic that extends mutable ranges into InferReactiveScopeVariables to handle a specific case, but inevitably discover that the logic needs to be part of the InferMutableRanges fixpoint loop. That happened in the past with extending the range of phi operands to account for subsequent mutations, which I moved to InferMutableRanges a while back. But InferReactiveScopeVariables also has logic to group co-mutations in the same scope, which also extends ranges of the co-mutating operands to have the same end point. Recently mofeiz found some cases where this is insufficient, where a closure captures a value that could change via a co-mutation, and where failure to extend the ranges in the fixpoint meant the function expression appeared independently memoizable when it wasn't.
The fix is to make InferMutableRanges update ranges to account for co-mutations. That is relatively straightforward, but not enough! The problem is that the fixpoint loop stopped once the alias sets coalesced, but co-mutations only affect ranges and not aliases. So the other part of the fix is to have the fixpoint condition use a custom canonicalization that describes each identifiers root _and_ the mutable range of that root.
[ghstack-poisoned]
We've occassionally added logic that extends mutable ranges into InferReactiveScopeVariables to handle a specific case, but inevitably discover that the logic needs to be part of the InferMutableRanges fixpoint loop. That happened in the past with extending the range of phi operands to account for subsequent mutations, which I moved to InferMutableRanges a while back. But InferReactiveScopeVariables also has logic to group co-mutations in the same scope, which also extends ranges of the co-mutating operands to have the same end point. Recently @mofeiz found some cases where this is insufficient, where a closure captures a value that could change via a co-mutation, and where failure to extend the ranges in the fixpoint meant the function expression appeared independently memoizable when it wasn't.
The fix is to make InferMutableRanges update ranges to account for co-mutations. That is relatively straightforward, but not enough! The problem is that the fixpoint loop stopped once the alias sets coalesced, but co-mutations only affect ranges and not aliases. So the other part of the fix is to have the fixpoint condition use a custom canonicalization that describes each identifiers root _and_ the mutable range of that root.
[ghstack-poisoned]
This is a stab at addressing a pattern that mofeiz and I have both stumbled across. Today, FunctionExpression's context list describes values from the outer context that are accessed in the function, and with what effect they were accessed. This allows us to describe the fact that a value from the outer context is known to be mutated inside a function expression, or is known to be captured (aliased) into some other value in the function expression. However, the basic `Effect` kind is insufficient to describe the full semantics. Notably, it doesn't let us describe more complex aliasing relationships.
From an example mofeiz added:
```js
const x = {};
const y = {};
const f = () => {
const a = [y];
const b = x;
// this sets y.x = x
a[0].x = b;
}
f();
mutate(y.x); // which means this mutates x!
```
Here, the Effect on the context operands are `[mutate y, read x]`. The `mutate y` is bc of the array push. But the `read x` is surprising — `x` is captured into `y`, but there is no subsequent mutation of y or x, so we consider this a read. But as the comments indicate, the final line mutates x! We need to reflect the fact that even though x isn't mutated inside the function, it is aliased into y, such that if y is subsequently mutated that this should count as a mutation of x too.
The idea of this PR is to extend the FunctionEffect type with a CaptureEffect variant which lists out the aliasing groups that occur inside the function expression. This allows us to bubble up the results of alias analysis from inside a function. The idea is to:
* Return the alias sets from InferMutableRanges
* Augment them with capturing of the form above, handling cases such as the `a[0].x = b`
* For each alias group, record a CaptureEffect for any group that contains 2+ context operands
* Extend the alias sets in the _outer_ function with the CaptureEffect sets from FunctionExpression/ObjectMethod instructions.
This isn't quite right yet, just sharing early hacking.
[ghstack-poisoned]
This is a stab at addressing a pattern that mofeiz and I have both stumbled across. Today, FunctionExpression's context list describes values from the outer context that are accessed in the function, and with what effect they were accessed. This allows us to describe the fact that a value from the outer context is known to be mutated inside a function expression, or is known to be captured (aliased) into some other value in the function expression. However, the basic `Effect` kind is insufficient to describe the full semantics. Notably, it doesn't let us describe more complex aliasing relationships.
From an example mofeiz added:
```js
const x = {};
const y = {};
const f = () => {
const a = [y];
const b = x;
// this sets y.x = x
a[0].x = b;
}
f();
mutate(y.x); // which means this mutates x!
```
Here, the Effect on the context operands are `[mutate y, read x]`. The `mutate y` is bc of the array push. But the `read x` is surprising — `x` is captured into `y`, but there is no subsequent mutation of y or x, so we consider this a read. But as the comments indicate, the final line mutates x! We need to reflect the fact that even though x isn't mutated inside the function, it is aliased into y, such that if y is subsequently mutated that this should count as a mutation of x too.
The idea of this PR is to extend the FunctionEffect type with a CaptureEffect variant which lists out the aliasing groups that occur inside the function expression. This allows us to bubble up the results of alias analysis from inside a function. The idea is to:
* Return the alias sets from InferMutableRanges
* Augment them with capturing of the form above, handling cases such as the `a[0].x = b`
* For each alias group, record a CaptureEffect for any group that contains 2+ context operands
* Extend the alias sets in the _outer_ function with the CaptureEffect sets from FunctionExpression/ObjectMethod instructions.
This isn't quite right yet, just sharing early hacking.
[ghstack-poisoned]
New take on #29716
## Summary
Template literals consisting entirely of constant values will be inlined
to a string literal, effectively replacing the backticks with a double
quote.
This is done primarily to make the resulting instruction a string
literal, so it can be processed further in constant propatation. So this
is now correctly simplified to `true`:
```js
`` === "" // now true
`a${1}` === "a1" // now true
```
If a template string literal can only partially be comptime-evaluated,
it is not that useful for dead code elimination or further constant
folding steps and thus, is left as-is in that case. Same is true if the
literal contains an array, object, symbol or function.
## How did you test this change?
See added tests.
(Almost) all pragmas are now one of the following:
- `@...TestOnly`: custom pragma for test fixtures
- `@<configName>` | `@<configName>:true`: enables with either true or a
default enabled value
- `@<configName>:<json value>`
This is a stab at addressing a pattern that @mofeiz and I have both stumbled across. Today, FunctionExpression's context list describes values from the outer context that are accessed in the function, and with what effect they were accessed. This allows us to describe the fact that a value from the outer context is known to be mutated inside a function expression, or is known to be captured (aliased) into some other value in the function expression. However, the basic `Effect` kind is insufficient to describe the full semantics. Notably, it doesn't let us describe more complex aliasing relationships.
From an example @mofeiz added:
```js
const x = {};
const y = {};
const f = () => {
const a = [y];
const b = x;
// this sets y.x = x
a[0].x = b;
}
f();
mutate(y.x); // which means this mutates x!
```
Here, the Effect on the context operands are `[mutate y, read x]`. The `mutate y` is bc of the array push. But the `read x` is surprising — `x` is captured into `y`, but there is no subsequent mutation of y or x, so we consider this a read. But as the comments indicate, the final line mutates x! We need to reflect the fact that even though x isn't mutated inside the function, it is aliased into y, such that if y is subsequently mutated that this should count as a mutation of x too.
The idea of this PR is to extend the FunctionEffect type with a CaptureEffect variant which lists out the aliasing groups that occur inside the function expression. This allows us to bubble up the results of alias analysis from inside a function. The idea is to:
* Return the alias sets from InferMutableRanges
* Augment them with capturing of the form above, handling cases such as the `a[0].x = b`
* For each alias group, record a CaptureEffect for any group that contains 2+ context operands
* Extend the alias sets in the _outer_ function with the CaptureEffect sets from FunctionExpression/ObjectMethod instructions.
This isn't quite right yet, just sharing early hacking.
[ghstack-poisoned]
## Summary
`-constant` is represented as a `UnaryExpression` node that is currently
not part of constant folding. If the operand is a constant number, the
node is folded to `constant * -1`. This also coerces `-0` to `0`,
resulting in `0 === -0` being folded to `true`.
## How did you test this change?
See attached tests
Note that bailing out adds false positives for hoisted functions whose
only references are within other functions. For example, this rewrite
would be safe.
```js
// source program
function foo() {
return bar();
}
function bar() {
return 42;
}
// compiler output
let bar;
if (/* deps changed */) {
function foo() {
return bar();
}
bar = function bar() {
return 42;
}
}
```
These false positives are difficult to detect because any maybe-call of
foo before the definition of bar would be invalid.
Instead of bailing out, we should rewrite hoisted function declarations
to the following form.
```js
let bar$0;
if (/* deps changed */) {
// All references within the declaring memo block
// or before the function declaration should use
// the original identifier `bar`
function foo() {
return bar();
}
function bar() {
return 42;
}
bar$0 = bar;
}
// All references after the declaring memo block
// or after the function declaration should use
// the rewritten declaration `bar$0`
```
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]
Found when testing the new validation from #33079 internally. I haven't fully debugged, but somehow the combination of the effect function *accessing* a ref and also calling a second function which has a purely local mutation triggers the validation. Even though the called second function only mutates local variables. If i remove the ref access in the effect function, the error goes away.
Anyway I'll keep debugging, putting up a repro for now.
[ghstack-poisoned]
This revisits a validation I built a while ago, trying to make it more strict this time to ensure that it's high-signal.
We detect function expressions which are *known* mutable — they definitely can modify a variable defined outside of the function expression itself (modulo control flow). This uses types to look for known Store and Mutate effects only, and disregards mutations of effects. Any such function passed to a location with a Freeze effect is reported as a validation error.
This is behind a flag and disabled by default. If folks agree this makes sense to revisit, i'll test out internally and we can consider enabling by default.
ghstack-source-id: 075a731444
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/33079
If a function captures a mutable value but never gets called, we don't infer a mutable range for that function. This means that we also don't alias the function with its mutable captures.
This case is tricky, because we don't generally know for sure what is a mutation and what may just be a normal function call. For example:
```js
hook useFoo() {
const x = makeObject();
return () => {
return readObject(x); // could be a mutation!
}
}
```
If we pessimistically assume that all such cases are mutations, we'd have to group lots of memo scopes together unnecessarily. However, if there is definitely a mutation:
```js
hook useFoo(createEntryForKey) {
const cache = new WeakMap();
return (key) => {
let entry = cache.get(key);
if (entry == null) {
entry = createEntryForKey(key);
cache.set(key, entry); // known mutation!
}
return entry;
}
}
```
Then we have to ensure that the function and its mutable captures alias together and end up in the same scope. However, aliasing together isn't enough if the function and operands all have empty mutable ranges (end = start + 1).
This pass finds function expressions and object methods that have an empty mutable range and known-mutable operands which also don't have a mutable range, and ensures that the function and those operands are aliased together *and* that their ranges are updated to end after the function expression. This is sufficient to ensure that a reactive scope is created for the alias set.
NOTE: The alternative is to reject these cases. If we do that we'd also want to similarly disallow cases like passing a mutable function to a hook.
ghstack-source-id: 5d8158246a
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/33078
Building on mofeiz's recent work to type constructors. Also, types for reanimated values which are useful in the next PR.
ghstack-source-id: 1c81e213a1
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/33077
This pass didn't previously report the precise difference btw inferred/manual dependencies unless a debug flag was set. But the error message is really good (nice job mofeiz): the only catch is that in theory the inferred dep could be a temporary that can't trivially be reported to the user.
But the messages are really useful for quickly verifying why the compiler couldn't preserve memoization. So here we switch to outputting a detailed message about the discrepancy btw inferred/manual deps so long as the inferred dep root is a named variable. I also slightly adjusted the message to handle the case where there is no diagnostic, which can occur if there were no manual deps but the compiler inferred a dependency.
ghstack-source-id: 534f6f1fec
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/33095
If a JSX attribute value is a string that contains unicode or other characters that need special escaping, we wrap the attribute value in an expression container. However, our unicode to detect this only handled the basic unicode character plane, not the "astral" plane which includes emojis.
This PR updates the regex to detect such extended characters and also use an expression container.
ghstack-source-id: 6d9c8e4dd2
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/33096
We weren't treating terminal operands as eligible for memoization in PruneNonEscapingScopes, which meant that they could end up un-memoized. Terminal operands can also be compound ReactiveValues like SequenceExpressions, so part of the fix is to make sure we don't just recurse into compound values but record the full aliasing information we would for top-level instructions.
Still WIP, this needs to handle terminals other than for..of.
ghstack-source-id: 09a2923051
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/33062
```js
function Component() {
useEffect(() => {
let hasCleanedUp = false;
document.addEventListener(..., () => hasCleanedUp ? foo() : bar());
// effect return values shouldn't be typed as frozen
return () => {
hasCleanedUp = true;
}
};
}
```
### Problem
`PruneHoistedContexts` currently strips hoisted declarations and
rewrites the first `StoreContext` reassignment to a declaration. For
example, in the following example, instruction 0 is removed while a
synthetic `DeclareContext let` is inserted before instruction 1.
```js
// source
const cb = () => x; // reference that causes x to be hoisted
let x = 4;
x = 5;
// React Compiler IR
[0] DeclareContext HoistedLet 'x'
...
[1] StoreContext reassign 'x' = 4
[2] StoreContext reassign 'x' = 5
```
Currently, we don't account for `DeclareContext let`. As a result, we're
rewriting to insert duplicate declarations.
```js
// source
const cb = () => x; // reference that causes x to be hoisted
let x;
x = 5;
// React Compiler IR
[0] DeclareContext HoistedLet 'x'
...
[1] DeclareContext Let 'x'
[2] StoreContext reassign 'x' = 5
```
### Solution
Instead of always lowering context variables to a DeclareContext
followed by a StoreContext reassign, we can keep `kind: 'Const' | 'Let'
| 'Reassign' | etc` on StoreContext.
Pros:
- retain more information in HIR, so we can codegen easily `const` and
`let` context variable declarations back
- pruning hoisted `DeclareContext` instructions is simple.
Cons:
- passes are more verbose as we need to check for both `DeclareContext`
and `StoreContext` declarations
~(note: also see alternative implementation in
https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/32745)~
### Testing
Context variables are tricky. I synced and diffed changes in a large
meta codebase and feel pretty confident about landing this. About 0.01%
of compiled files changed. Among these changes, ~25% were [direct
bugfixes](https://www.internalfb.com/phabricator/paste/view/P1800029094).
The [other
changes](https://www.internalfb.com/phabricator/paste/view/P1800028575)
were primarily due to changed (corrected) mutable ranges from
https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/33047. I tried to represent most
interesting changes in new test fixtures
`
Fixes an edge case in React Compiler's effects inference model.
Returned values should only be typed as 'frozen' if they are (1) local
and (2) not a function expression which may capture and mutate this
function's outer context. See test fixtures for details
---
[//]: # (BEGIN SAPLING FOOTER)
Stack created with [Sapling](https://sapling-scm.com). Best reviewed
with [ReviewStack](https://reviewstack.dev/facebook/react/pull/33047).
* #32765
* #32747
* __->__ #33047
When effect dependencies cannot be inferred due to memoization-related
bailouts or unexpected mutable ranges (which currently often have to do
with writes to refs), fall back to traversing the effect lambda itself.
This fallback uses the same logic as PropagateScopeDependencies:
1. Collect a sidemap of loads and property loads
2. Find hoistable accesses from the control flow graph. Note that here,
we currently take into account the mutable ranges of instructions (see
`mutate-after-useeffect-granular-access` fixture)
3. Collect the set of property paths accessed by the effect
4. Merge to get the set of minimal dependencies
Inferred effect dependencies and inlined jsx (both experimental
features) rely on `InferReactivePlaces` to determine their dependencies.
Since adding type inference for phi nodes
(https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/30796), we have been incorrectly
inferring stable-typed value blocks (e.g. `props.cond ? setState1 :
setState2`) as non-reactive. This fix patches InferReactivePlaces
instead of adding a new pass since we want non-reactivity propagated
correctly
Previously the CompileSuccess event would emit first before CompileSkip,
so the lsp's codelens would incorrectly flag skipped components/hooks
(via 'use no memo') as being optimized.
---
[//]: # (BEGIN SAPLING FOOTER)
Stack created with [Sapling](https://sapling-scm.com). Best reviewed
with [ReviewStack](https://reviewstack.dev/facebook/react/pull/33012).
* __->__ #33012
* #33011
* #33010
Adds a new codeaction event in the compiler and handler in forgive. This
allows you to remove a dependency array when you're editing a range that
is within an autodep eligible function.
Co-authored-by: Jordan Brown <jmbrown@meta.com>
---
[//]: # (BEGIN SAPLING FOOTER)
Stack created with [Sapling](https://sapling-scm.com). Best reviewed
with [ReviewStack](https://reviewstack.dev/facebook/react/pull/33000).
* #33002
* #33001
* __->__ #33000
Co-authored-by: Jordan Brown <jmbrown@meta.com>
Summary: We landed on not including fire functions in dep arrays. They
aren't needed because all values returned from the useFire hook call
will read from the same ref. The linter will error if you include a
fired function in an explicit dep array.
Test Plan: yarn snap --watch
--
Currently, inferred effect dependencies are considered a
"compiler-required" feature. This means that untransformed callsites
should escalate to a build error.
`ValidateNoUntransformedReferences` iterates 'special effect' callsites
and checks that the compiler was able to successfully transform them.
Prior to this PR, this relied on checking the number of arguments passed
to this special effect.
This obviously doesn't work with `noEmit: true`, which is used for our
eslint plugin (this avoids mutating the babel program as other linters
run with the same ast). This PR adds a set of `babel.SourceLocation`s to
do best effort matching in this mode.
Currently, `babel-plugin-react-compiler` is bundled with (almost) all
external dependencies. This is because babel traversal and ast logic is
not forward-compatible. Since `babel-plugin-react-compiler` needs to be
compatible with babel pipelines across a wide semvar range, we (1) set
this package's babel dependency to an early version and (2) inline babel
libraries into our bundle.
A few other packages in `react/compiler` depend on the compiler. This PR
moves `snap`, our test fixture compiler and evaluator, to use the
bundled version of `babel-plugin-react-compiler`. This decouples the
babel version used by `snap` with the version used by
`babel-plugin-react-compiler`, which means that `snap` now can test
features from newer babel versions (see
https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/32742).
---
[//]: # (BEGIN SAPLING FOOTER)
Stack created with [Sapling](https://sapling-scm.com). Best reviewed
with [ReviewStack](https://reviewstack.dev/facebook/react/pull/32758).
* #32759
* __->__ #32758
(Found when compiling Meta React code)
Let variable declarations and reassignments are currently rewritten to
`StoreLocal <varName>` instructions, which each translates to a new
`const varName` declaration in codegen.
```js
// Example input
function useHook() {
const getX = () => x;
let x = CONSTANT1;
if (cond) {
x += CONSTANT2;
}
return <Stringify getX={getX} />
}
// Compiled output, prior to this PR
import { c as _c } from "react/compiler-runtime";
function useHook() {
const $ = _c(1);
let t0;
if ($[0] === Symbol.for("react.memo_cache_sentinel")) {
const getX = () => x;
let x = CONSTANT1;
if (cond) {
let x = x + CONSTANT2;
x;
}
t0 = <Stringify getX={getX} />;
$[0] = t0;
} else {
t0 = $[0];
}
return t0;
}
```
This also manifests as a babel internal error when replacing the
original function declaration with the compiler output. The below
compilation output fails with `Duplicate declaration "x" (This is an
error on an internal node. Probably an internal error.)`.
```js
// example input
let x = CONSTANT1;
if (cond) {
x += CONSTANT2;
x = CONSTANT3;
}
// current output
let x = CONSTANT1;
if (playheadDragState) {
let x = x + CONSTANT2
x;
let x = CONSTANT3;
}
```
Avoid failing builds when imported function specifiers conflict by using
babel's `generateUid`. Failing a build is very disruptive, as it usually
presents to developers similar to a javascript parse error.
```js
import {logRender as _logRender} from 'instrument-runtime';
const logRender = () => { /* local conflicting implementation */ }
function Component_optimized() {
_logRender(); // inserted by compiler
}
```
Currently, we fail builds (even in `panicThreshold:none` cases) when
import specifiers are detected to conflict with existing local
variables. The reason we destructively throw (instead of bailing out) is
because (1) we first generate identifier references to the conflicting
name in compiled functions, (2) replaced original functions with
compiled functions, and then (3) finally check for conflicts.
When we finally check for conflicts, it's too late to bail out.
```js
// import {logRender} from 'instrument-runtime';
const logRender = () => { /* local conflicting implementation */ }
function Component_optimized() {
logRender(); // inserted by compiler
}
```
Adds Effect.ConditionallyMutateIterator, which has the following
effects:
- capture for known array, map, and sets
- mutate for all other values
An alternative to this approach could be to add polymorphic shape
definitions
* Adds `isConstructor: boolean` to `FunctionType`. With this PR, each
typed function can either be a constructor (currently only known
globals) or non constructor. Alternatively, we prefer to encode
polymorphic types / effects (and match the closest subtype)
* Add Map and Set globals + built-ins
---
[//]: # (BEGIN SAPLING FOOTER)
Stack created with [Sapling](https://sapling-scm.com). Best reviewed
with [ReviewStack](https://reviewstack.dev/facebook/react/pull/32697).
* #32698
* __->__ #32697
Joe Savona
mofeiZandGitHub
Niklas MollenhauerandGitHub
laurenandGitHub
