varmod-ifelse.mk revision 1.21 1 1.21 rillig # $NetBSD: varmod-ifelse.mk,v 1.21 2023/02/18 18:23:58 rillig Exp $
2 1.1 rillig #
3 1.2 rillig # Tests for the ${cond:?then:else} variable modifier, which evaluates either
4 1.2 rillig # the then-expression or the else-expression, depending on the condition.
5 1.5 rillig #
6 1.5 rillig # The modifier was added on 1998-04-01.
7 1.5 rillig #
8 1.5 rillig # Until 2015-10-11, the modifier always evaluated both the "then" and the
9 1.5 rillig # "else" expressions.
10 1.1 rillig
11 1.1 rillig # TODO: Implementation
12 1.1 rillig
13 1.5 rillig # The variable name of the expression is expanded and then taken as the
14 1.18 rillig # condition. In the below example it becomes:
15 1.5 rillig #
16 1.18 rillig # variable expression == "literal"
17 1.5 rillig #
18 1.5 rillig # This confuses the parser, which expects an operator instead of the bare
19 1.5 rillig # word "expression". If the name were expanded lazily, everything would be
20 1.5 rillig # fine since the condition would be:
21 1.5 rillig #
22 1.5 rillig # ${:Uvariable expression} == "literal"
23 1.5 rillig #
24 1.5 rillig # Evaluating the variable name lazily would require additional code in
25 1.5 rillig # Var_Parse and ParseVarname, it would be more useful and predictable
26 1.5 rillig # though.
27 1.5 rillig .if ${${:Uvariable expression} == "literal":?bad:bad}
28 1.5 rillig . error
29 1.5 rillig .else
30 1.5 rillig . error
31 1.5 rillig .endif
32 1.5 rillig
33 1.5 rillig # In a variable assignment, undefined variables are not an error.
34 1.5 rillig # Because of the early expansion, the whole condition evaluates to
35 1.5 rillig # ' == ""' though, which cannot be parsed because the left-hand side looks
36 1.5 rillig # empty.
37 1.5 rillig COND:= ${${UNDEF} == "":?bad-assign:bad-assign}
38 1.5 rillig
39 1.5 rillig # In a condition, undefined variables generate a "Malformed conditional"
40 1.5 rillig # error. That error message is wrong though. In lint mode, the correct
41 1.5 rillig # "Undefined variable" error message is generated.
42 1.5 rillig # The difference to the ':=' variable assignment is the additional
43 1.5 rillig # "Malformed conditional" error message.
44 1.5 rillig .if ${${UNDEF} == "":?bad-cond:bad-cond}
45 1.5 rillig . error
46 1.5 rillig .else
47 1.5 rillig . error
48 1.5 rillig .endif
49 1.5 rillig
50 1.4 rillig # When the :? is parsed, it is greedy. The else branch spans all the
51 1.4 rillig # text, up until the closing character '}', even if the text looks like
52 1.4 rillig # another modifier.
53 1.4 rillig .if ${1:?then:else:Q} != "then"
54 1.4 rillig . error
55 1.4 rillig .endif
56 1.4 rillig .if ${0:?then:else:Q} != "else:Q"
57 1.4 rillig . error
58 1.4 rillig .endif
59 1.3 rillig
60 1.6 rillig # This line generates 2 error messages. The first comes from evaluating the
61 1.6 rillig # malformed conditional "1 == == 2", which is reported as "Bad conditional
62 1.6 rillig # expression" by ApplyModifier_IfElse. The variable expression containing that
63 1.6 rillig # conditional therefore returns a parse error from Var_Parse, and this parse
64 1.6 rillig # error propagates to CondEvalExpression, where the "Malformed conditional"
65 1.6 rillig # comes from.
66 1.6 rillig .if ${1 == == 2:?yes:no} != ""
67 1.6 rillig . error
68 1.6 rillig .else
69 1.6 rillig . error
70 1.6 rillig .endif
71 1.6 rillig
72 1.6 rillig # If the "Bad conditional expression" appears in a quoted string literal, the
73 1.6 rillig # error message "Malformed conditional" is not printed, leaving only the "Bad
74 1.6 rillig # conditional expression".
75 1.6 rillig #
76 1.6 rillig # XXX: The left-hand side is enclosed in quotes. This results in Var_Parse
77 1.11 rillig # being called without VARE_UNDEFERR. When ApplyModifier_IfElse
78 1.6 rillig # returns AMR_CLEANUP as result, Var_Parse returns varUndefined since the
79 1.6 rillig # value of the variable expression is still undefined. CondParser_String is
80 1.6 rillig # then supposed to do proper error handling, but since varUndefined is local
81 1.6 rillig # to var.c, it cannot distinguish this return value from an ordinary empty
82 1.6 rillig # string. The left-hand side of the comparison is therefore just an empty
83 1.6 rillig # string, which is obviously equal to the empty string on the right-hand side.
84 1.6 rillig #
85 1.6 rillig # XXX: The debug log for -dc shows a comparison between 1.0 and 0.0. The
86 1.6 rillig # condition should be detected as being malformed before any comparison is
87 1.6 rillig # done since there is no well-formed comparison in the condition at all.
88 1.6 rillig .MAKEFLAGS: -dc
89 1.6 rillig .if "${1 == == 2:?yes:no}" != ""
90 1.6 rillig . error
91 1.6 rillig .else
92 1.6 rillig . warning Oops, the parse error should have been propagated.
93 1.6 rillig .endif
94 1.6 rillig .MAKEFLAGS: -d0
95 1.6 rillig
96 1.7 rillig # As of 2020-12-10, the variable "name" is first expanded, and the result of
97 1.7 rillig # this expansion is then taken as the condition. To force the variable
98 1.7 rillig # expression in the condition to be evaluated at exactly the right point,
99 1.7 rillig # the '$' of the intended '${VAR}' escapes from the parser in form of the
100 1.7 rillig # expression ${:U\$}. Because of this escaping, the variable "name" and thus
101 1.7 rillig # the condition ends up as "${VAR} == value", just as intended.
102 1.8 rillig #
103 1.8 rillig # This hack does not work for variables from .for loops since these are
104 1.8 rillig # expanded at parse time to their corresponding ${:Uvalue} expressions.
105 1.8 rillig # Making the '$' of the '${VAR}' expression indirect hides this expression
106 1.9 rillig # from the parser of the .for loop body. See ForLoop_SubstVarLong.
107 1.7 rillig .MAKEFLAGS: -dc
108 1.7 rillig VAR= value
109 1.20 rillig .if ${ ${:U\$}{VAR} == value:?ok:bad} != "ok"
110 1.7 rillig . error
111 1.7 rillig .endif
112 1.7 rillig .MAKEFLAGS: -d0
113 1.7 rillig
114 1.14 rillig # On 2021-04-19, when building external/bsd/tmux with HAVE_LLVM=yes and
115 1.14 rillig # HAVE_GCC=no, the following conditional generated this error message:
116 1.14 rillig #
117 1.14 rillig # make: Bad conditional expression 'string == "literal" && no >= 10'
118 1.14 rillig # in 'string == "literal" && no >= 10?yes:no'
119 1.14 rillig #
120 1.14 rillig # Despite the error message (which was not clearly marked with "error:"),
121 1.14 rillig # the build continued, for historical reasons, see main_Exit.
122 1.14 rillig #
123 1.14 rillig # The tricky detail here is that the condition that looks so obvious in the
124 1.14 rillig # form written in the makefile becomes tricky when it is actually evaluated.
125 1.14 rillig # This is because the condition is written in the place of the variable name
126 1.14 rillig # of the expression, and in an expression, the variable name is always
127 1.14 rillig # expanded first, before even looking at the modifiers. This happens for the
128 1.14 rillig # modifier ':?' as well, so when CondEvalExpression gets to see the
129 1.14 rillig # expression, it already looks like this:
130 1.14 rillig #
131 1.14 rillig # string == "literal" && no >= 10
132 1.14 rillig #
133 1.14 rillig # When parsing such an expression, the parser used to be strict. It first
134 1.14 rillig # evaluated the left-hand side of the operator '&&' and then started parsing
135 1.14 rillig # the right-hand side 'no >= 10'. The word 'no' is obviously a string
136 1.19 rillig # literal, not enclosed in quotes, which is OK, even on the left-hand side of
137 1.14 rillig # the comparison operator, but only because this is a condition in the
138 1.14 rillig # modifier ':?'. In an ordinary directive '.if', this would be a parse error.
139 1.14 rillig # For strings, only the comparison operators '==' and '!=' are defined,
140 1.14 rillig # therefore parsing stopped at the '>', producing the 'Bad conditional
141 1.14 rillig # expression'.
142 1.12 rillig #
143 1.16 rillig # Ideally, the conditional expression would not be expanded before parsing
144 1.16 rillig # it. This would allow to write the conditions exactly as seen below. That
145 1.16 rillig # change has a high chance of breaking _some_ existing code and would need
146 1.16 rillig # to be thoroughly tested.
147 1.16 rillig #
148 1.16 rillig # Since cond.c 1.262 from 2021-04-20, make reports a more specific error
149 1.16 rillig # message in situations like these, pointing directly to the specific problem
150 1.16 rillig # instead of just saying that the whole condition is bad.
151 1.12 rillig STRING= string
152 1.14 rillig NUMBER= no # not really a number
153 1.12 rillig .info ${${STRING} == "literal" && ${NUMBER} >= 10:?yes:no}.
154 1.14 rillig .info ${${STRING} == "literal" || ${NUMBER} >= 10:?yes:no}.
155 1.15 rillig
156 1.15 rillig # The following situation occasionally occurs with MKINET6 or similar
157 1.15 rillig # variables.
158 1.15 rillig NUMBER= # empty, not really a number either
159 1.15 rillig .info ${${STRING} == "literal" && ${NUMBER} >= 10:?yes:no}.
160 1.15 rillig .info ${${STRING} == "literal" || ${NUMBER} >= 10:?yes:no}.
161 1.17 rillig
162 1.17 rillig # CondParser_LeafToken handles [0-9-+] specially, treating them as a number.
163 1.17 rillig PLUS= +
164 1.17 rillig ASTERISK= *
165 1.17 rillig EMPTY= # empty
166 1.17 rillig # "true" since "+" is not the empty string.
167 1.17 rillig .info ${${PLUS} :?true:false}
168 1.17 rillig # "false" since the variable named "*" is not defined.
169 1.17 rillig .info ${${ASTERISK} :?true:false}
170 1.17 rillig # syntax error since the condition is completely blank.
171 1.17 rillig .info ${${EMPTY} :?true:false}
172 1.19 rillig
173 1.19 rillig
174 1.19 rillig # Since the condition of the '?:' modifier is expanded before being parsed and
175 1.19 rillig # evaluated, it is common practice to enclose expressions in quotes, to avoid
176 1.19 rillig # producing syntactically invalid conditions such as ' == value'. This only
177 1.19 rillig # works if the expanded values neither contain quotes nor backslashes. For
178 1.19 rillig # strings containing quotes or backslashes, the '?:' modifier should not be
179 1.19 rillig # used.
180 1.19 rillig PRIMES= 2 3 5 7 11
181 1.19 rillig .if ${1 2 3 4 5:L:@n@$n:${ ("${PRIMES:M$n}" != "") :?prime:not_prime}@} != \
182 1.19 rillig "1:not_prime 2:prime 3:prime 4:not_prime 5:prime"
183 1.19 rillig . error
184 1.19 rillig .endif
185 1.21 rillig
186 1.21 rillig # When parsing the modifier ':?', there are 3 possible cases:
187 1.21 rillig #
188 1.21 rillig # 1. The whole expression is only parsed.
189 1.21 rillig # 2. The expression is parsed and the 'then' branch is evaluated.
190 1.21 rillig # 3. The expression is parsed and the 'else' branch is evaluated.
191 1.21 rillig #
192 1.21 rillig # In all of these cases, the expression must be parsed in the same way,
193 1.21 rillig # especially when one of the branches contains unbalanced '{}' braces.
194 1.21 rillig #
195 1.21 rillig # At 2020-01-01, the expressions from the 'then' and 'else' branches were
196 1.21 rillig # parsed differently, depending on whether the branch was taken or not. When
197 1.21 rillig # the branch was taken, the parser recognized that in the modifier ':S,}},,',
198 1.21 rillig # the '}}' were ordinary characters. When the branch was not taken, the
199 1.21 rillig # parser only counted balanced '{' and '}', ignoring any escaping or other
200 1.21 rillig # changes in the interpretation.
201 1.21 rillig #
202 1.21 rillig # In var.c 1.285 from 2020-07-20, the parsing of the expressions changed so
203 1.21 rillig # that in both cases the expression is parsed in the same way, taking the
204 1.21 rillig # unbalanced braces in the ':S' modifiers into account. This change was not
205 1.21 rillig # on purpose, the commit message mentioned 'has the same effect', which was a
206 1.21 rillig # wrong assumption.
207 1.21 rillig #
208 1.21 rillig # In var.c 1.323 from 2020-07-26, the unintended fix from var.c 1.285 was
209 1.21 rillig # reverted, still not knowing about the difference between regular parsing and
210 1.21 rillig # balanced-mode parsing.
211 1.21 rillig #
212 1.21 rillig # In var.c 1.1028 from 2022-08-08, there was another attempt at fixing this
213 1.21 rillig # inconsistency in parsing, but since that broke parsing of the modifier ':@',
214 1.21 rillig # it was reverted in var.c 1.1029 from 2022-08-23.
215 1.21 rillig #
216 1.21 rillig # In var.c 1.1047 from 2023-02-18, the inconsistency in parsing was finally
217 1.21 rillig # fixed. The modifier ':@' now parses the body in balanced mode, while
218 1.21 rillig # everywhere else the modifier parts have their subexpressions parsed in the
219 1.21 rillig # same way, no matter whether they are evaluated or not.
220 1.21 rillig #
221 1.21 rillig # The modifiers ':@' and ':?' are similar in that they conceptually contain
222 1.21 rillig # text to be evaluated later or conditionally, still they parse that text
223 1.21 rillig # differently. The crucial difference is that the body of the modifier ':@'
224 1.21 rillig # is always parsed using balanced mode. The modifier ':?', on the other hand,
225 1.21 rillig # must parse both of its branches in the same way, no matter whether they are
226 1.21 rillig # evaluated or not. Since balanced mode and standard mode are incompatible,
227 1.21 rillig # it's impossible to use balanced mode in the modifier ':?'.
228 1.21 rillig .MAKEFLAGS: -dc
229 1.21 rillig .if 0 && ${1:?${:Uthen0:S,}},,}:${:Uelse0:S,}},,}} != "not evaluated"
230 1.21 rillig # At 2020-01-07, the expression evaluated to 'then0,,}}', even though it was
231 1.21 rillig # irrelevant as the '0' had already been evaluated to 'false'.
232 1.21 rillig . error
233 1.21 rillig .endif
234 1.21 rillig .if 1 && ${0:?${:Uthen1:S,}},,}:${:Uelse1:S,}},,}} != "else1"
235 1.21 rillig . error
236 1.21 rillig .endif
237 1.21 rillig .if 2 && ${1:?${:Uthen2:S,}},,}:${:Uelse2:S,}},,}} != "then2"
238 1.21 rillig # At 2020-01-07, the whole expression evaluated to 'then2,,}}' instead of the
239 1.21 rillig # expected 'then2'. The 'then' branch of the ':?' modifier was parsed
240 1.21 rillig # normally, parsing and evaluating the ':S' modifier, thereby treating the
241 1.21 rillig # '}}' as ordinary characters and resulting in 'then2'. The 'else' branch was
242 1.21 rillig # parsed in balanced mode, ignoring that the inner '}}' were ordinary
243 1.21 rillig # characters. The '}}' were thus interpreted as the end of the 'else' branch
244 1.21 rillig # and the whole expression. This left the trailing ',,}}', which together
245 1.21 rillig # with the 'then2' formed the result 'then2,,}}'.
246 1.21 rillig . error
247 1.21 rillig .endif
248 1.21 rillig .MAKEFLAGS: -d0
249