3 ==================================================
4 Kaleidoscope: Extending the Language: Control Flow
5 ==================================================
10 Chapter 5 Introduction
11 ======================
13 Welcome to Chapter 5 of the "`Implementing a language with
14 LLVM <index.html>`_" tutorial. Parts 1-4 described the implementation of
15 the simple Kaleidoscope language and included support for generating
16 LLVM IR, followed by optimizations and a JIT compiler. Unfortunately, as
17 presented, Kaleidoscope is mostly useless: it has no control flow other
18 than call and return. This means that you can't have conditional
19 branches in the code, significantly limiting its power. In this episode
20 of "build that compiler", we'll extend Kaleidoscope to have an
21 if/then/else expression plus a simple 'for' loop.
26 Extending Kaleidoscope to support if/then/else is quite straightforward.
27 It basically requires adding support for this "new" concept to the
28 lexer, parser, AST, and LLVM code emitter. This example is nice, because
29 it shows how easy it is to "grow" a language over time, incrementally
30 extending it as new ideas are discovered.
32 Before we get going on "how" we add this extension, let's talk about
33 "what" we want. The basic idea is that we want to be able to write this
44 In Kaleidoscope, every construct is an expression: there are no
45 statements. As such, the if/then/else expression needs to return a value
46 like any other. Since we're using a mostly functional form, we'll have
47 it evaluate its conditional, then return the 'then' or 'else' value
48 based on how the condition was resolved. This is very similar to the C
51 The semantics of the if/then/else expression is that it evaluates the
52 condition to a boolean equality value: 0.0 is considered to be false and
53 everything else is considered to be true. If the condition is true, the
54 first subexpression is evaluated and returned, if the condition is
55 false, the second subexpression is evaluated and returned. Since
56 Kaleidoscope allows side-effects, this behavior is important to nail
59 Now that we know what we "want", let's break this down into its
62 Lexer Extensions for If/Then/Else
63 ---------------------------------
65 The lexer extensions are straightforward. First we add new enum values
66 for the relevant tokens:
75 Once we have that, we recognize the new keywords in the lexer. This is
81 if (IdentifierStr == "def")
83 if (IdentifierStr == "extern")
85 if (IdentifierStr == "if")
87 if (IdentifierStr == "then")
89 if (IdentifierStr == "else")
91 return tok_identifier;
93 AST Extensions for If/Then/Else
94 -------------------------------
96 To represent the new expression we add a new AST node for it:
100 /// IfExprAST - Expression class for if/then/else.
101 class IfExprAST : public ExprAST {
102 std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> Cond, Then, Else;
105 IfExprAST(std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> Cond, std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> Then,
106 std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> Else)
107 : Cond(std::move(Cond)), Then(std::move(Then)), Else(std::move(Else)) {}
109 Value *codegen() override;
112 The AST node just has pointers to the various subexpressions.
114 Parser Extensions for If/Then/Else
115 ----------------------------------
117 Now that we have the relevant tokens coming from the lexer and we have
118 the AST node to build, our parsing logic is relatively straightforward.
119 First we define a new parsing function:
123 /// ifexpr ::= 'if' expression 'then' expression 'else' expression
124 static std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> ParseIfExpr() {
125 getNextToken(); // eat the if.
128 auto Cond = ParseExpression();
132 if (CurTok != tok_then)
133 return LogError("expected then");
134 getNextToken(); // eat the then
136 auto Then = ParseExpression();
140 if (CurTok != tok_else)
141 return LogError("expected else");
145 auto Else = ParseExpression();
149 return std::make_unique<IfExprAST>(std::move(Cond), std::move(Then),
153 Next we hook it up as a primary expression:
157 static std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> ParsePrimary() {
160 return LogError("unknown token when expecting an expression");
162 return ParseIdentifierExpr();
164 return ParseNumberExpr();
166 return ParseParenExpr();
168 return ParseIfExpr();
172 LLVM IR for If/Then/Else
173 ------------------------
175 Now that we have it parsing and building the AST, the final piece is
176 adding LLVM code generation support. This is the most interesting part
177 of the if/then/else example, because this is where it starts to
178 introduce new concepts. All of the code above has been thoroughly
179 described in previous chapters.
181 To motivate the code we want to produce, let's take a look at a simple
188 def baz(x) if x then foo() else bar();
190 If you disable optimizations, the code you'll (soon) get from
191 Kaleidoscope looks like this:
195 declare double @foo()
197 declare double @bar()
199 define double @baz(double %x) {
201 %ifcond = fcmp one double %x, 0.000000e+00
202 br i1 %ifcond, label %then, label %else
204 then: ; preds = %entry
205 %calltmp = call double @foo()
208 else: ; preds = %entry
209 %calltmp1 = call double @bar()
212 ifcont: ; preds = %else, %then
213 %iftmp = phi double [ %calltmp, %then ], [ %calltmp1, %else ]
217 To visualize the control flow graph, you can use a nifty feature of the
218 LLVM '`opt <http://llvm.org/cmds/opt.html>`_' tool. If you put this LLVM
219 IR into "t.ll" and run "``llvm-as < t.ll | opt -analyze -view-cfg``", `a
220 window will pop up <../ProgrammersManual.html#viewing-graphs-while-debugging-code>`_ and you'll
223 .. figure:: LangImpl05-cfg.png
229 Another way to get this is to call "``F->viewCFG()``" or
230 "``F->viewCFGOnly()``" (where F is a "``Function*``") either by
231 inserting actual calls into the code and recompiling or by calling these
232 in the debugger. LLVM has many nice features for visualizing various
235 Getting back to the generated code, it is fairly simple: the entry block
236 evaluates the conditional expression ("x" in our case here) and compares
237 the result to 0.0 with the "``fcmp one``" instruction ('one' is "Ordered
238 and Not Equal"). Based on the result of this expression, the code jumps
239 to either the "then" or "else" blocks, which contain the expressions for
240 the true/false cases.
242 Once the then/else blocks are finished executing, they both branch back
243 to the 'ifcont' block to execute the code that happens after the
244 if/then/else. In this case the only thing left to do is to return to the
245 caller of the function. The question then becomes: how does the code
246 know which expression to return?
248 The answer to this question involves an important SSA operation: the
250 operation <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Static_single_assignment_form>`_.
251 If you're not familiar with SSA, `the wikipedia
252 article <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Static_single_assignment_form>`_
253 is a good introduction and there are various other introductions to it
254 available on your favorite search engine. The short version is that
255 "execution" of the Phi operation requires "remembering" which block
256 control came from. The Phi operation takes on the value corresponding to
257 the input control block. In this case, if control comes in from the
258 "then" block, it gets the value of "calltmp". If control comes from the
259 "else" block, it gets the value of "calltmp1".
261 At this point, you are probably starting to think "Oh no! This means my
262 simple and elegant front-end will have to start generating SSA form in
263 order to use LLVM!". Fortunately, this is not the case, and we strongly
264 advise *not* implementing an SSA construction algorithm in your
265 front-end unless there is an amazingly good reason to do so. In
266 practice, there are two sorts of values that float around in code
267 written for your average imperative programming language that might need
270 #. Code that involves user variables: ``x = 1; x = x + 1;``
271 #. Values that are implicit in the structure of your AST, such as the
272 Phi node in this case.
274 In `Chapter 7 <LangImpl07.html>`_ of this tutorial ("mutable variables"),
275 we'll talk about #1 in depth. For now, just believe me that you don't
276 need SSA construction to handle this case. For #2, you have the choice
277 of using the techniques that we will describe for #1, or you can insert
278 Phi nodes directly, if convenient. In this case, it is really
279 easy to generate the Phi node, so we choose to do it directly.
281 Okay, enough of the motivation and overview, let's generate code!
283 Code Generation for If/Then/Else
284 --------------------------------
286 In order to generate code for this, we implement the ``codegen`` method
291 Value *IfExprAST::codegen() {
292 Value *CondV = Cond->codegen();
296 // Convert condition to a bool by comparing non-equal to 0.0.
297 CondV = Builder.CreateFCmpONE(
298 CondV, ConstantFP::get(TheContext, APFloat(0.0)), "ifcond");
300 This code is straightforward and similar to what we saw before. We emit
301 the expression for the condition, then compare that value to zero to get
302 a truth value as a 1-bit (bool) value.
306 Function *TheFunction = Builder.GetInsertBlock()->getParent();
308 // Create blocks for the then and else cases. Insert the 'then' block at the
309 // end of the function.
311 BasicBlock::Create(TheContext, "then", TheFunction);
312 BasicBlock *ElseBB = BasicBlock::Create(TheContext, "else");
313 BasicBlock *MergeBB = BasicBlock::Create(TheContext, "ifcont");
315 Builder.CreateCondBr(CondV, ThenBB, ElseBB);
317 This code creates the basic blocks that are related to the if/then/else
318 statement, and correspond directly to the blocks in the example above.
319 The first line gets the current Function object that is being built. It
320 gets this by asking the builder for the current BasicBlock, and asking
321 that block for its "parent" (the function it is currently embedded
324 Once it has that, it creates three blocks. Note that it passes
325 "TheFunction" into the constructor for the "then" block. This causes the
326 constructor to automatically insert the new block into the end of the
327 specified function. The other two blocks are created, but aren't yet
328 inserted into the function.
330 Once the blocks are created, we can emit the conditional branch that
331 chooses between them. Note that creating new blocks does not implicitly
332 affect the IRBuilder, so it is still inserting into the block that the
333 condition went into. Also note that it is creating a branch to the
334 "then" block and the "else" block, even though the "else" block isn't
335 inserted into the function yet. This is all ok: it is the standard way
336 that LLVM supports forward references.
341 Builder.SetInsertPoint(ThenBB);
343 Value *ThenV = Then->codegen();
347 Builder.CreateBr(MergeBB);
348 // Codegen of 'Then' can change the current block, update ThenBB for the PHI.
349 ThenBB = Builder.GetInsertBlock();
351 After the conditional branch is inserted, we move the builder to start
352 inserting into the "then" block. Strictly speaking, this call moves the
353 insertion point to be at the end of the specified block. However, since
354 the "then" block is empty, it also starts out by inserting at the
355 beginning of the block. :)
357 Once the insertion point is set, we recursively codegen the "then"
358 expression from the AST. To finish off the "then" block, we create an
359 unconditional branch to the merge block. One interesting (and very
360 important) aspect of the LLVM IR is that it `requires all basic blocks
361 to be "terminated" <../LangRef.html#functionstructure>`_ with a `control
362 flow instruction <../LangRef.html#terminators>`_ such as return or
363 branch. This means that all control flow, *including fall throughs* must
364 be made explicit in the LLVM IR. If you violate this rule, the verifier
367 The final line here is quite subtle, but is very important. The basic
368 issue is that when we create the Phi node in the merge block, we need to
369 set up the block/value pairs that indicate how the Phi will work.
370 Importantly, the Phi node expects to have an entry for each predecessor
371 of the block in the CFG. Why then, are we getting the current block when
372 we just set it to ThenBB 5 lines above? The problem is that the "Then"
373 expression may actually itself change the block that the Builder is
374 emitting into if, for example, it contains a nested "if/then/else"
375 expression. Because calling ``codegen()`` recursively could arbitrarily change
376 the notion of the current block, we are required to get an up-to-date
377 value for code that will set up the Phi node.
382 TheFunction->getBasicBlockList().push_back(ElseBB);
383 Builder.SetInsertPoint(ElseBB);
385 Value *ElseV = Else->codegen();
389 Builder.CreateBr(MergeBB);
390 // codegen of 'Else' can change the current block, update ElseBB for the PHI.
391 ElseBB = Builder.GetInsertBlock();
393 Code generation for the 'else' block is basically identical to codegen
394 for the 'then' block. The only significant difference is the first line,
395 which adds the 'else' block to the function. Recall previously that the
396 'else' block was created, but not added to the function. Now that the
397 'then' and 'else' blocks are emitted, we can finish up with the merge
403 TheFunction->getBasicBlockList().push_back(MergeBB);
404 Builder.SetInsertPoint(MergeBB);
406 Builder.CreatePHI(Type::getDoubleTy(TheContext), 2, "iftmp");
408 PN->addIncoming(ThenV, ThenBB);
409 PN->addIncoming(ElseV, ElseBB);
413 The first two lines here are now familiar: the first adds the "merge"
414 block to the Function object (it was previously floating, like the else
415 block above). The second changes the insertion point so that newly
416 created code will go into the "merge" block. Once that is done, we need
417 to create the PHI node and set up the block/value pairs for the PHI.
419 Finally, the CodeGen function returns the phi node as the value computed
420 by the if/then/else expression. In our example above, this returned
421 value will feed into the code for the top-level function, which will
422 create the return instruction.
424 Overall, we now have the ability to execute conditional code in
425 Kaleidoscope. With this extension, Kaleidoscope is a fairly complete
426 language that can calculate a wide variety of numeric functions. Next up
427 we'll add another useful expression that is familiar from non-functional
430 'for' Loop Expression
431 =====================
433 Now that we know how to add basic control flow constructs to the
434 language, we have the tools to add more powerful things. Let's add
435 something more aggressive, a 'for' expression:
439 extern putchard(char);
441 for i = 1, i < n, 1.0 in
442 putchard(42); # ascii 42 = '*'
444 # print 100 '*' characters
447 This expression defines a new variable ("i" in this case) which iterates
448 from a starting value, while the condition ("i < n" in this case) is
449 true, incrementing by an optional step value ("1.0" in this case). If
450 the step value is omitted, it defaults to 1.0. While the loop is true,
451 it executes its body expression. Because we don't have anything better
452 to return, we'll just define the loop as always returning 0.0. In the
453 future when we have mutable variables, it will get more useful.
455 As before, let's talk about the changes that we need to Kaleidoscope to
458 Lexer Extensions for the 'for' Loop
459 -----------------------------------
461 The lexer extensions are the same sort of thing as for if/then/else:
465 ... in enum Token ...
467 tok_if = -6, tok_then = -7, tok_else = -8,
468 tok_for = -9, tok_in = -10
471 if (IdentifierStr == "def")
473 if (IdentifierStr == "extern")
475 if (IdentifierStr == "if")
477 if (IdentifierStr == "then")
479 if (IdentifierStr == "else")
481 if (IdentifierStr == "for")
483 if (IdentifierStr == "in")
485 return tok_identifier;
487 AST Extensions for the 'for' Loop
488 ---------------------------------
490 The AST node is just as simple. It basically boils down to capturing the
491 variable name and the constituent expressions in the node.
495 /// ForExprAST - Expression class for for/in.
496 class ForExprAST : public ExprAST {
498 std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> Start, End, Step, Body;
501 ForExprAST(const std::string &VarName, std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> Start,
502 std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> End, std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> Step,
503 std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> Body)
504 : VarName(VarName), Start(std::move(Start)), End(std::move(End)),
505 Step(std::move(Step)), Body(std::move(Body)) {}
507 Value *codegen() override;
510 Parser Extensions for the 'for' Loop
511 ------------------------------------
513 The parser code is also fairly standard. The only interesting thing here
514 is handling of the optional step value. The parser code handles it by
515 checking to see if the second comma is present. If not, it sets the step
516 value to null in the AST node:
520 /// forexpr ::= 'for' identifier '=' expr ',' expr (',' expr)? 'in' expression
521 static std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> ParseForExpr() {
522 getNextToken(); // eat the for.
524 if (CurTok != tok_identifier)
525 return LogError("expected identifier after for");
527 std::string IdName = IdentifierStr;
528 getNextToken(); // eat identifier.
531 return LogError("expected '=' after for");
532 getNextToken(); // eat '='.
535 auto Start = ParseExpression();
539 return LogError("expected ',' after for start value");
542 auto End = ParseExpression();
546 // The step value is optional.
547 std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> Step;
550 Step = ParseExpression();
555 if (CurTok != tok_in)
556 return LogError("expected 'in' after for");
557 getNextToken(); // eat 'in'.
559 auto Body = ParseExpression();
563 return std::make_unique<ForExprAST>(IdName, std::move(Start),
564 std::move(End), std::move(Step),
568 And again we hook it up as a primary expression:
572 static std::unique_ptr<ExprAST> ParsePrimary() {
575 return LogError("unknown token when expecting an expression");
577 return ParseIdentifierExpr();
579 return ParseNumberExpr();
581 return ParseParenExpr();
583 return ParseIfExpr();
585 return ParseForExpr();
589 LLVM IR for the 'for' Loop
590 --------------------------
592 Now we get to the good part: the LLVM IR we want to generate for this
593 thing. With the simple example above, we get this LLVM IR (note that
594 this dump is generated with optimizations disabled for clarity):
598 declare double @putchard(double)
600 define double @printstar(double %n) {
602 ; initial value = 1.0 (inlined into phi)
605 loop: ; preds = %loop, %entry
606 %i = phi double [ 1.000000e+00, %entry ], [ %nextvar, %loop ]
608 %calltmp = call double @putchard(double 4.200000e+01)
610 %nextvar = fadd double %i, 1.000000e+00
613 %cmptmp = fcmp ult double %i, %n
614 %booltmp = uitofp i1 %cmptmp to double
615 %loopcond = fcmp one double %booltmp, 0.000000e+00
616 br i1 %loopcond, label %loop, label %afterloop
618 afterloop: ; preds = %loop
619 ; loop always returns 0.0
620 ret double 0.000000e+00
623 This loop contains all the same constructs we saw before: a phi node,
624 several expressions, and some basic blocks. Let's see how this fits
627 Code Generation for the 'for' Loop
628 ----------------------------------
630 The first part of codegen is very simple: we just output the start
631 expression for the loop value:
635 Value *ForExprAST::codegen() {
636 // Emit the start code first, without 'variable' in scope.
637 Value *StartVal = Start->codegen();
641 With this out of the way, the next step is to set up the LLVM basic
642 block for the start of the loop body. In the case above, the whole loop
643 body is one block, but remember that the body code itself could consist
644 of multiple blocks (e.g. if it contains an if/then/else or a for/in
649 // Make the new basic block for the loop header, inserting after current
651 Function *TheFunction = Builder.GetInsertBlock()->getParent();
652 BasicBlock *PreheaderBB = Builder.GetInsertBlock();
654 BasicBlock::Create(TheContext, "loop", TheFunction);
656 // Insert an explicit fall through from the current block to the LoopBB.
657 Builder.CreateBr(LoopBB);
659 This code is similar to what we saw for if/then/else. Because we will
660 need it to create the Phi node, we remember the block that falls through
661 into the loop. Once we have that, we create the actual block that starts
662 the loop and create an unconditional branch for the fall-through between
667 // Start insertion in LoopBB.
668 Builder.SetInsertPoint(LoopBB);
670 // Start the PHI node with an entry for Start.
671 PHINode *Variable = Builder.CreatePHI(Type::getDoubleTy(TheContext),
673 Variable->addIncoming(StartVal, PreheaderBB);
675 Now that the "preheader" for the loop is set up, we switch to emitting
676 code for the loop body. To begin with, we move the insertion point and
677 create the PHI node for the loop induction variable. Since we already
678 know the incoming value for the starting value, we add it to the Phi
679 node. Note that the Phi will eventually get a second value for the
680 backedge, but we can't set it up yet (because it doesn't exist!).
684 // Within the loop, the variable is defined equal to the PHI node. If it
685 // shadows an existing variable, we have to restore it, so save it now.
686 Value *OldVal = NamedValues[VarName];
687 NamedValues[VarName] = Variable;
689 // Emit the body of the loop. This, like any other expr, can change the
690 // current BB. Note that we ignore the value computed by the body, but don't
692 if (!Body->codegen())
695 Now the code starts to get more interesting. Our 'for' loop introduces a
696 new variable to the symbol table. This means that our symbol table can
697 now contain either function arguments or loop variables. To handle this,
698 before we codegen the body of the loop, we add the loop variable as the
699 current value for its name. Note that it is possible that there is a
700 variable of the same name in the outer scope. It would be easy to make
701 this an error (emit an error and return null if there is already an
702 entry for VarName) but we choose to allow shadowing of variables. In
703 order to handle this correctly, we remember the Value that we are
704 potentially shadowing in ``OldVal`` (which will be null if there is no
707 Once the loop variable is set into the symbol table, the code
708 recursively codegen's the body. This allows the body to use the loop
709 variable: any references to it will naturally find it in the symbol
714 // Emit the step value.
715 Value *StepVal = nullptr;
717 StepVal = Step->codegen();
721 // If not specified, use 1.0.
722 StepVal = ConstantFP::get(TheContext, APFloat(1.0));
725 Value *NextVar = Builder.CreateFAdd(Variable, StepVal, "nextvar");
727 Now that the body is emitted, we compute the next value of the iteration
728 variable by adding the step value, or 1.0 if it isn't present.
729 '``NextVar``' will be the value of the loop variable on the next
730 iteration of the loop.
734 // Compute the end condition.
735 Value *EndCond = End->codegen();
739 // Convert condition to a bool by comparing non-equal to 0.0.
740 EndCond = Builder.CreateFCmpONE(
741 EndCond, ConstantFP::get(TheContext, APFloat(0.0)), "loopcond");
743 Finally, we evaluate the exit value of the loop, to determine whether
744 the loop should exit. This mirrors the condition evaluation for the
745 if/then/else statement.
749 // Create the "after loop" block and insert it.
750 BasicBlock *LoopEndBB = Builder.GetInsertBlock();
751 BasicBlock *AfterBB =
752 BasicBlock::Create(TheContext, "afterloop", TheFunction);
754 // Insert the conditional branch into the end of LoopEndBB.
755 Builder.CreateCondBr(EndCond, LoopBB, AfterBB);
757 // Any new code will be inserted in AfterBB.
758 Builder.SetInsertPoint(AfterBB);
760 With the code for the body of the loop complete, we just need to finish
761 up the control flow for it. This code remembers the end block (for the
762 phi node), then creates the block for the loop exit ("afterloop"). Based
763 on the value of the exit condition, it creates a conditional branch that
764 chooses between executing the loop again and exiting the loop. Any
765 future code is emitted in the "afterloop" block, so it sets the
766 insertion position to it.
770 // Add a new entry to the PHI node for the backedge.
771 Variable->addIncoming(NextVar, LoopEndBB);
773 // Restore the unshadowed variable.
775 NamedValues[VarName] = OldVal;
777 NamedValues.erase(VarName);
779 // for expr always returns 0.0.
780 return Constant::getNullValue(Type::getDoubleTy(TheContext));
783 The final code handles various cleanups: now that we have the "NextVar"
784 value, we can add the incoming value to the loop PHI node. After that,
785 we remove the loop variable from the symbol table, so that it isn't in
786 scope after the for loop. Finally, code generation of the for loop
787 always returns 0.0, so that is what we return from
788 ``ForExprAST::codegen()``.
790 With this, we conclude the "adding control flow to Kaleidoscope" chapter
791 of the tutorial. In this chapter we added two control flow constructs,
792 and used them to motivate a couple of aspects of the LLVM IR that are
793 important for front-end implementors to know. In the next chapter of our
794 saga, we will get a bit crazier and add `user-defined
795 operators <LangImpl06.html>`_ to our poor innocent language.
800 Here is the complete code listing for our running example, enhanced with
801 the if/then/else and for expressions. To build this example, use:
806 clang++ -g toy.cpp `llvm-config --cxxflags --ldflags --system-libs --libs core mcjit native` -O3 -o toy
812 .. literalinclude:: ../../../examples/Kaleidoscope/Chapter5/toy.cpp
815 `Next: Extending the language: user-defined operators <LangImpl06.html>`_