Home | History | Annotate | Line # | Download | only in unit-tests
varmod-ifelse.mk revision 1.28
      1  1.28  rillig # $NetBSD: varmod-ifelse.mk,v 1.28 2024/04/23 22:51:28 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  1.25  rillig #	bare words == "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  1.25  rillig #	${:Ubare words} == "literal"
     23   1.5  rillig #
     24   1.5  rillig # Evaluating the variable name lazily would require additional code in
     25   1.5  rillig # Var_Parse and ParseVarname, it would be more useful and predictable
     26   1.5  rillig # though.
     27  1.25  rillig # expect+1: Malformed conditional (${${:Ubare words} == "literal":?bad:bad})
     28  1.25  rillig .if ${${:Ubare words} == "literal":?bad:bad}
     29   1.5  rillig .  error
     30   1.5  rillig .else
     31   1.5  rillig .  error
     32   1.5  rillig .endif
     33   1.5  rillig 
     34   1.5  rillig # In a variable assignment, undefined variables are not an error.
     35   1.5  rillig # Because of the early expansion, the whole condition evaluates to
     36   1.5  rillig # ' == ""' though, which cannot be parsed because the left-hand side looks
     37   1.5  rillig # empty.
     38   1.5  rillig COND:=	${${UNDEF} == "":?bad-assign:bad-assign}
     39   1.5  rillig 
     40   1.5  rillig # In a condition, undefined variables generate a "Malformed conditional"
     41   1.5  rillig # error.  That error message is wrong though.  In lint mode, the correct
     42   1.5  rillig # "Undefined variable" error message is generated.
     43   1.5  rillig # The difference to the ':=' variable assignment is the additional
     44   1.5  rillig # "Malformed conditional" error message.
     45  1.22  rillig # expect+1: Malformed conditional (${${UNDEF} == "":?bad-cond:bad-cond})
     46   1.5  rillig .if ${${UNDEF} == "":?bad-cond:bad-cond}
     47   1.5  rillig .  error
     48   1.5  rillig .else
     49   1.5  rillig .  error
     50   1.5  rillig .endif
     51   1.5  rillig 
     52   1.4  rillig # When the :? is parsed, it is greedy.  The else branch spans all the
     53   1.4  rillig # text, up until the closing character '}', even if the text looks like
     54   1.4  rillig # another modifier.
     55   1.4  rillig .if ${1:?then:else:Q} != "then"
     56   1.4  rillig .  error
     57   1.4  rillig .endif
     58   1.4  rillig .if ${0:?then:else:Q} != "else:Q"
     59   1.4  rillig .  error
     60   1.4  rillig .endif
     61   1.3  rillig 
     62   1.6  rillig # This line generates 2 error messages.  The first comes from evaluating the
     63   1.6  rillig # malformed conditional "1 == == 2", which is reported as "Bad conditional
     64  1.25  rillig # expression" by ApplyModifier_IfElse.  The expression containing that
     65   1.6  rillig # conditional therefore returns a parse error from Var_Parse, and this parse
     66   1.6  rillig # error propagates to CondEvalExpression, where the "Malformed conditional"
     67   1.6  rillig # comes from.
     68  1.22  rillig # expect+1: Malformed conditional (${1 == == 2:?yes:no} != "")
     69   1.6  rillig .if ${1 == == 2:?yes:no} != ""
     70   1.6  rillig .  error
     71   1.6  rillig .else
     72   1.6  rillig .  error
     73   1.6  rillig .endif
     74   1.6  rillig 
     75   1.6  rillig # If the "Bad conditional expression" appears in a quoted string literal, the
     76   1.6  rillig # error message "Malformed conditional" is not printed, leaving only the "Bad
     77   1.6  rillig # conditional expression".
     78   1.6  rillig #
     79   1.6  rillig # XXX: The left-hand side is enclosed in quotes.  This results in Var_Parse
     80  1.11  rillig # being called without VARE_UNDEFERR.  When ApplyModifier_IfElse
     81   1.6  rillig # returns AMR_CLEANUP as result, Var_Parse returns varUndefined since the
     82  1.25  rillig # value of the expression is still undefined.  CondParser_String is
     83   1.6  rillig # then supposed to do proper error handling, but since varUndefined is local
     84   1.6  rillig # to var.c, it cannot distinguish this return value from an ordinary empty
     85   1.6  rillig # string.  The left-hand side of the comparison is therefore just an empty
     86   1.6  rillig # string, which is obviously equal to the empty string on the right-hand side.
     87   1.6  rillig #
     88   1.6  rillig # XXX: The debug log for -dc shows a comparison between 1.0 and 0.0.  The
     89   1.6  rillig # condition should be detected as being malformed before any comparison is
     90   1.6  rillig # done since there is no well-formed comparison in the condition at all.
     91   1.6  rillig .MAKEFLAGS: -dc
     92   1.6  rillig .if "${1 == == 2:?yes:no}" != ""
     93   1.6  rillig .  error
     94   1.6  rillig .else
     95  1.22  rillig # expect+1: warning: Oops, the parse error should have been propagated.
     96   1.6  rillig .  warning Oops, the parse error should have been propagated.
     97   1.6  rillig .endif
     98   1.6  rillig .MAKEFLAGS: -d0
     99   1.6  rillig 
    100  1.23  rillig # As of 2020-12-10, the variable "VAR" is first expanded, and the result of
    101  1.25  rillig # this expansion is then taken as the condition.  To force the
    102   1.7  rillig # expression in the condition to be evaluated at exactly the right point,
    103   1.7  rillig # the '$' of the intended '${VAR}' escapes from the parser in form of the
    104  1.23  rillig # expression ${:U\$}.  Because of this escaping, the variable "VAR" and thus
    105   1.7  rillig # the condition ends up as "${VAR} == value", just as intended.
    106   1.8  rillig #
    107   1.8  rillig # This hack does not work for variables from .for loops since these are
    108   1.8  rillig # expanded at parse time to their corresponding ${:Uvalue} expressions.
    109   1.8  rillig # Making the '$' of the '${VAR}' expression indirect hides this expression
    110   1.9  rillig # from the parser of the .for loop body.  See ForLoop_SubstVarLong.
    111   1.7  rillig .MAKEFLAGS: -dc
    112   1.7  rillig VAR=	value
    113  1.20  rillig .if ${ ${:U\$}{VAR} == value:?ok:bad} != "ok"
    114   1.7  rillig .  error
    115   1.7  rillig .endif
    116   1.7  rillig .MAKEFLAGS: -d0
    117   1.7  rillig 
    118  1.14  rillig # On 2021-04-19, when building external/bsd/tmux with HAVE_LLVM=yes and
    119  1.14  rillig # HAVE_GCC=no, the following conditional generated this error message:
    120  1.14  rillig #
    121  1.14  rillig #	make: Bad conditional expression 'string == "literal" && no >= 10'
    122  1.14  rillig #	    in 'string == "literal" && no >= 10?yes:no'
    123  1.14  rillig #
    124  1.14  rillig # Despite the error message (which was not clearly marked with "error:"),
    125  1.14  rillig # the build continued, for historical reasons, see main_Exit.
    126  1.14  rillig #
    127  1.14  rillig # The tricky detail here is that the condition that looks so obvious in the
    128  1.14  rillig # form written in the makefile becomes tricky when it is actually evaluated.
    129  1.14  rillig # This is because the condition is written in the place of the variable name
    130  1.14  rillig # of the expression, and in an expression, the variable name is always
    131  1.14  rillig # expanded first, before even looking at the modifiers.  This happens for the
    132  1.14  rillig # modifier ':?' as well, so when CondEvalExpression gets to see the
    133  1.14  rillig # expression, it already looks like this:
    134  1.14  rillig #
    135  1.14  rillig #	string == "literal" && no >= 10
    136  1.14  rillig #
    137  1.14  rillig # When parsing such an expression, the parser used to be strict.  It first
    138  1.14  rillig # evaluated the left-hand side of the operator '&&' and then started parsing
    139  1.14  rillig # the right-hand side 'no >= 10'.  The word 'no' is obviously a string
    140  1.19  rillig # literal, not enclosed in quotes, which is OK, even on the left-hand side of
    141  1.14  rillig # the comparison operator, but only because this is a condition in the
    142  1.14  rillig # modifier ':?'.  In an ordinary directive '.if', this would be a parse error.
    143  1.14  rillig # For strings, only the comparison operators '==' and '!=' are defined,
    144  1.14  rillig # therefore parsing stopped at the '>', producing the 'Bad conditional
    145  1.14  rillig # expression'.
    146  1.12  rillig #
    147  1.16  rillig # Ideally, the conditional expression would not be expanded before parsing
    148  1.16  rillig # it.  This would allow to write the conditions exactly as seen below.  That
    149  1.16  rillig # change has a high chance of breaking _some_ existing code and would need
    150  1.16  rillig # to be thoroughly tested.
    151  1.16  rillig #
    152  1.16  rillig # Since cond.c 1.262 from 2021-04-20, make reports a more specific error
    153  1.16  rillig # message in situations like these, pointing directly to the specific problem
    154  1.16  rillig # instead of just saying that the whole condition is bad.
    155  1.12  rillig STRING=		string
    156  1.14  rillig NUMBER=		no		# not really a number
    157  1.22  rillig # expect+1: no.
    158  1.12  rillig .info ${${STRING} == "literal" && ${NUMBER} >= 10:?yes:no}.
    159  1.27  rillig # expect+3: while evaluating variable "string == "literal" || no >= 10": Comparison with '>=' requires both operands 'no' and '10' to be numeric
    160  1.26  rillig # expect: make: Bad conditional expression 'string == "literal" || no >= 10' before '?yes:no'
    161  1.23  rillig # expect+1: .
    162  1.14  rillig .info ${${STRING} == "literal" || ${NUMBER} >= 10:?yes:no}.
    163  1.15  rillig 
    164  1.15  rillig # The following situation occasionally occurs with MKINET6 or similar
    165  1.15  rillig # variables.
    166  1.15  rillig NUMBER=		# empty, not really a number either
    167  1.26  rillig # expect: make: Bad conditional expression 'string == "literal" &&  >= 10' before '?yes:no'
    168  1.22  rillig # expect+1: .
    169  1.15  rillig .info ${${STRING} == "literal" && ${NUMBER} >= 10:?yes:no}.
    170  1.26  rillig # expect: make: Bad conditional expression 'string == "literal" ||  >= 10' before '?yes:no'
    171  1.22  rillig # expect+1: .
    172  1.15  rillig .info ${${STRING} == "literal" || ${NUMBER} >= 10:?yes:no}.
    173  1.17  rillig 
    174  1.17  rillig # CondParser_LeafToken handles [0-9-+] specially, treating them as a number.
    175  1.17  rillig PLUS=		+
    176  1.17  rillig ASTERISK=	*
    177  1.17  rillig EMPTY=		# empty
    178  1.17  rillig # "true" since "+" is not the empty string.
    179  1.23  rillig # expect+1: <true>
    180  1.23  rillig .info <${${PLUS}		:?true:false}>
    181  1.17  rillig # "false" since the variable named "*" is not defined.
    182  1.23  rillig # expect+1: <false>
    183  1.23  rillig .info <${${ASTERISK}	:?true:false}>
    184  1.17  rillig # syntax error since the condition is completely blank.
    185  1.23  rillig # expect+1: <>
    186  1.23  rillig .info <${${EMPTY}	:?true:false}>
    187  1.19  rillig 
    188  1.19  rillig 
    189  1.19  rillig # Since the condition of the '?:' modifier is expanded before being parsed and
    190  1.19  rillig # evaluated, it is common practice to enclose expressions in quotes, to avoid
    191  1.19  rillig # producing syntactically invalid conditions such as ' == value'.  This only
    192  1.19  rillig # works if the expanded values neither contain quotes nor backslashes.  For
    193  1.19  rillig # strings containing quotes or backslashes, the '?:' modifier should not be
    194  1.19  rillig # used.
    195  1.19  rillig PRIMES=	2 3 5 7 11
    196  1.19  rillig .if ${1 2 3 4 5:L:@n@$n:${ ("${PRIMES:M$n}" != "") :?prime:not_prime}@} != \
    197  1.19  rillig   "1:not_prime 2:prime 3:prime 4:not_prime 5:prime"
    198  1.19  rillig .  error
    199  1.19  rillig .endif
    200  1.21  rillig 
    201  1.21  rillig # When parsing the modifier ':?', there are 3 possible cases:
    202  1.21  rillig #
    203  1.21  rillig #	1. The whole expression is only parsed.
    204  1.21  rillig #	2. The expression is parsed and the 'then' branch is evaluated.
    205  1.21  rillig #	3. The expression is parsed and the 'else' branch is evaluated.
    206  1.21  rillig #
    207  1.21  rillig # In all of these cases, the expression must be parsed in the same way,
    208  1.21  rillig # especially when one of the branches contains unbalanced '{}' braces.
    209  1.21  rillig #
    210  1.21  rillig # At 2020-01-01, the expressions from the 'then' and 'else' branches were
    211  1.21  rillig # parsed differently, depending on whether the branch was taken or not.  When
    212  1.21  rillig # the branch was taken, the parser recognized that in the modifier ':S,}},,',
    213  1.21  rillig # the '}}' were ordinary characters.  When the branch was not taken, the
    214  1.21  rillig # parser only counted balanced '{' and '}', ignoring any escaping or other
    215  1.21  rillig # changes in the interpretation.
    216  1.21  rillig #
    217  1.21  rillig # In var.c 1.285 from 2020-07-20, the parsing of the expressions changed so
    218  1.21  rillig # that in both cases the expression is parsed in the same way, taking the
    219  1.21  rillig # unbalanced braces in the ':S' modifiers into account.  This change was not
    220  1.21  rillig # on purpose, the commit message mentioned 'has the same effect', which was a
    221  1.21  rillig # wrong assumption.
    222  1.21  rillig #
    223  1.21  rillig # In var.c 1.323 from 2020-07-26, the unintended fix from var.c 1.285 was
    224  1.21  rillig # reverted, still not knowing about the difference between regular parsing and
    225  1.21  rillig # balanced-mode parsing.
    226  1.21  rillig #
    227  1.21  rillig # In var.c 1.1028 from 2022-08-08, there was another attempt at fixing this
    228  1.21  rillig # inconsistency in parsing, but since that broke parsing of the modifier ':@',
    229  1.21  rillig # it was reverted in var.c 1.1029 from 2022-08-23.
    230  1.21  rillig #
    231  1.21  rillig # In var.c 1.1047 from 2023-02-18, the inconsistency in parsing was finally
    232  1.21  rillig # fixed.  The modifier ':@' now parses the body in balanced mode, while
    233  1.21  rillig # everywhere else the modifier parts have their subexpressions parsed in the
    234  1.21  rillig # same way, no matter whether they are evaluated or not.
    235  1.21  rillig #
    236  1.21  rillig # The modifiers ':@' and ':?' are similar in that they conceptually contain
    237  1.21  rillig # text to be evaluated later or conditionally, still they parse that text
    238  1.21  rillig # differently.  The crucial difference is that the body of the modifier ':@'
    239  1.21  rillig # is always parsed using balanced mode.  The modifier ':?', on the other hand,
    240  1.21  rillig # must parse both of its branches in the same way, no matter whether they are
    241  1.21  rillig # evaluated or not.  Since balanced mode and standard mode are incompatible,
    242  1.21  rillig # it's impossible to use balanced mode in the modifier ':?'.
    243  1.21  rillig .MAKEFLAGS: -dc
    244  1.21  rillig .if 0 && ${1:?${:Uthen0:S,}},,}:${:Uelse0:S,}},,}} != "not evaluated"
    245  1.21  rillig # At 2020-01-07, the expression evaluated to 'then0,,}}', even though it was
    246  1.21  rillig # irrelevant as the '0' had already been evaluated to 'false'.
    247  1.21  rillig .  error
    248  1.21  rillig .endif
    249  1.21  rillig .if 1 && ${0:?${:Uthen1:S,}},,}:${:Uelse1:S,}},,}} != "else1"
    250  1.21  rillig .  error
    251  1.21  rillig .endif
    252  1.21  rillig .if 2 && ${1:?${:Uthen2:S,}},,}:${:Uelse2:S,}},,}} != "then2"
    253  1.21  rillig # At 2020-01-07, the whole expression evaluated to 'then2,,}}' instead of the
    254  1.21  rillig # expected 'then2'.  The 'then' branch of the ':?' modifier was parsed
    255  1.21  rillig # normally, parsing and evaluating the ':S' modifier, thereby treating the
    256  1.21  rillig # '}}' as ordinary characters and resulting in 'then2'.  The 'else' branch was
    257  1.21  rillig # parsed in balanced mode, ignoring that the inner '}}' were ordinary
    258  1.21  rillig # characters.  The '}}' were thus interpreted as the end of the 'else' branch
    259  1.21  rillig # and the whole expression.  This left the trailing ',,}}', which together
    260  1.21  rillig # with the 'then2' formed the result 'then2,,}}'.
    261  1.21  rillig .  error
    262  1.21  rillig .endif
    263  1.23  rillig 
    264  1.23  rillig 
    265  1.23  rillig # Since the condition is taken from the variable name of the expression, not
    266  1.23  rillig # from its value, it is evaluated early.  It is possible though to construct
    267  1.23  rillig # conditions that are evaluated lazily, at exactly the right point.  There is
    268  1.23  rillig # no way to escape a '$' directly in the variable name, but there are
    269  1.23  rillig # alternative ways to bring a '$' into the condition.
    270  1.23  rillig #
    271  1.23  rillig #	In an indirect condition using the ':U' modifier, each '$', ':' and
    272  1.23  rillig #	'}' must be escaped as '\$', '\:' and '\}', respectively, but '{' must
    273  1.23  rillig #	not be escaped.
    274  1.23  rillig #
    275  1.23  rillig #	In an indirect condition using a separate variable, each '$' must be
    276  1.23  rillig #	escaped as '$$'.
    277  1.23  rillig #
    278  1.23  rillig # These two forms allow the variables to contain arbitrary characters, as the
    279  1.23  rillig # condition parser does not see them.
    280  1.23  rillig DELAYED=	two
    281  1.23  rillig # expect+1: no
    282  1.23  rillig .info ${ ${:U \${DELAYED\} == "one"}:?yes:no}
    283  1.23  rillig # expect+1: yes
    284  1.23  rillig .info ${ ${:U \${DELAYED\} == "two"}:?yes:no}
    285  1.23  rillig INDIRECT_COND1=	$${DELAYED} == "one"
    286  1.23  rillig # expect+1: no
    287  1.23  rillig .info ${ ${INDIRECT_COND1}:?yes:no}
    288  1.23  rillig INDIRECT_COND2=	$${DELAYED} == "two"
    289  1.23  rillig # expect+1: yes
    290  1.23  rillig .info ${ ${INDIRECT_COND2}:?yes:no}
    291  1.23  rillig 
    292  1.23  rillig 
    293  1.21  rillig .MAKEFLAGS: -d0
    294  1.24  rillig 
    295  1.24  rillig 
    296  1.24  rillig # In the modifier parts for the 'then' and 'else' branches, subexpressions are
    297  1.28  rillig # parsed by inspecting the actual modifiers.  In 2008, 2015, 2020, 2022 and
    298  1.24  rillig # 2023, the exact parsing algorithm switched a few times, counting balanced
    299  1.24  rillig # braces instead of proper subexpressions, which meant that unbalanced braces
    300  1.24  rillig # were parsed differently, depending on whether the branch was active or not.
    301  1.24  rillig BRACES=	}}}
    302  1.24  rillig NO=	${0:?${BRACES:S,}}},yes,}:${BRACES:S,}}},no,}}
    303  1.24  rillig YES=	${1:?${BRACES:S,}}},yes,}:${BRACES:S,}}},no,}}
    304  1.24  rillig BOTH=	<${YES}> <${NO}>
    305  1.24  rillig .if ${BOTH} != "<yes> <no>"
    306  1.24  rillig .  error
    307  1.24  rillig .endif
    308