TypeChecking rework: Removal of typequeue #99

New Issue

deavmi · 2023-01-30T17:40:55Z

deavmi commented

2023-01-30 17:40:55 +00:00

What is this?

It came to my attention that we really needed to have types embedded in any instruction which was a Value instruction, therefore I then added this. However, what came of this was me effectively carrying around type information along with the Instructions we would popInstr() off - so why not use the valueInstr.type instead of the popType() and an entire different typequeue.

Therefore I decided to embark on a full transition to this method. This means we can do what we did with the codequeue as normal in the typechecking and codegeneration stage, but we get the added reusability-benefit of having said types available in the DGen (code emit stage).

### What is this? It came to my attention that we really needed to have types embedded in any instruction which was a `Value` instruction, therefore I then added this. However, what came of this was me effectively carrying around type information along with the `Instruction`s we would `popInstr()` off - so why not use the `valueInstr.type` instead of the `popType()` and an entire different typequeue. Therefore I decided to embark on a full transition to this method. This means we can do what we did with the `codequeue` as normal in the typechecking and codegeneration stage, but we get the added reusability-benefit of having said types available in the `DGen` (code emit stage).

deavmi added reference remove_typequeue

2023-01-30 17:40:58 +00:00

deavmi self-assigned this 2023-01-30 17:41:02 +00:00

deavmi added the due date 2023-02-01

2023-01-30 17:41:08 +00:00

deavmi added the

typing

label 2023-01-30 17:41:15 +00:00

deavmi added this to the Basics milestone 2023-01-30 17:41:19 +00:00

deavmi added this to the Dependency tree, type-checking and codegen project 2023-01-30 17:41:21 +00:00

deavmi commented

2023-02-03 14:26:32 +00:00