#########################
 Nuitka Developer Manual
#########################

The purpose of this Developer Manual is to present the current design of
Nuitka, the project rules, and the motivations for choices made. It is
intended to be a guide to the source code, and to give explanations that
don't fit into the source code in comments form.

It should be used as a reference for the process of planning and
documenting decisions we made. Therefore we are e.g. presenting here the
type inference plans before implementing them. And we update them as we
proceed.

It grows out of discussions and presentations made at conferences as
well as private conversations or issue tracker.

************
 Milestones
************

#. Feature parity with CPython, understand all the language construct
   and behave absolutely compatible.

   Feature parity has been reached for CPython 2.6 and 2.7. We do not
   target any older CPython release. For CPython 3 up to 3.13 it also
   has been reached. We do not target the older and practically unused
   CPython 3.0 to 3.3 releases.

   This milestone was reached. Dropping support for Python 2.6 is an
   option, should this prove to be any benefit. Currently it is not, as
   it extends the test coverage only.

#. Create the most efficient native code from this. This means to be
   fast with the basic Python object handling.

   This milestone was reached, although of course, micro optimizations
   to this are happening all the time.

#. Then do constant propagation, determine as many values and useful
   constraints as possible at compile time and create more efficient
   code.

   This milestone is considered almost reached. We continue to discover
   new things, but the infrastructure is there, and these are easy to
   add.

#. Type inference, detect and special case the handling of strings,
   integers, lists in the program.

   This milestone is considered in progress.

#. Add interfacing to C code, so Nuitka can turn a ``ctypes`` binding
   into an efficient binding as written with C.

   This milestone is planned only.

#. Add hints module with a useful Python implementation that the
   compiler can use to learn about types from the programmer.

   This milestone is planned only.

*****************
 Version Numbers
*****************

For Nuitka we use semantic versioning, initially with a leading zero
still, once we pass release ``1.9``, the scheme will indicate the ``10``
through using ``2.0``.

***************
 Current State
***************

Nuitka top level works like this:

-  ``nuitka.tree.Building`` outputs node tree

-  ``nuitka.optimization`` enhances it as best as it can

-  ``nuitka.finalization`` prepares the tree for code generation

-  ``nuitka.code_generation.CodeGeneration`` orchestrates the creation
   of code snippets

-  ``nuitka.code_generation.*Codes`` knows how specific code kinds are
   created

-  ``nuitka.MainControl`` keeps it all together

This design is intended to last.

Regarding types, the state is:

-  Types are always ``PyObject *``, and only a few C types, e.g.
   ``nuitka_bool`` and ``nuitka_void`` and more are coming. Even for
   objects, often it's know that things are e.g. really a
   ``PyTupleObject **``, but no C type is available for that yet.

-  There are a some specific use of types beyond "compile time
   constant", that are encoded in type and value shapes, which can be
   used to predict some operations, conditions, etc. if they raise, and
   result types they give.

-  In code generation, the supported C types are used, and sometimes we
   have specialized code generation, e.g. a binary operation that takes
   an ``int`` and a ``float`` and produces a ``float`` value. There will
   be fallbacks to less specific types.

The expansion with more C types is currently in progress, and there will
also be alternative C types, where e.g. ``PyObject *`` and ``C long``
are in an enum that indicates which value is valid, and where special
code will be available that can avoid creating the ``PyObject **``
unless the later overflows.

***************************************************
 Setting up the Development Environment for Nuitka
***************************************************

Currently there are very different kinds of files that we need support
for. This is best addressed with an IDE. We cover here how to setup the
most common one.

Visual Studio Code
==================

Download Visual Studio Code from here:
https://code.visualstudio.com/download

At this time, this is the recommended IDE for Linux and Windows. This is
going to cover the plugins to install. Configuration is part of the
``.vscode`` in your Nuitka checkout. If you are not familiar with
Eclipse, this is Free Software IDE,designed to be universally extended,
and it truly is. There are plugins available for nearly everything.

The extensions to be installed are part of the Visual Code
recommendations in ``.vscode/extensions.json`` and you will be prompted
about that and ought to install these.

Eclipse / PyCharm
=================

Don't use these anymore, we consider Visual Studio Code to be far
superior for delivering a nice out of the box environment.

*************************
 Commit and Code Hygiene
*************************

In Nuitka we have tools to auto format code, you can execute them
manually, but it's probably best to execute them at commit time, to make
sure when we share code, it's already well format, and to avoid noise
doing cleanups.

The kinds of changes also often cause unnecessary merge conflicts, while
the auto format is designed to format code also in a way that it avoids
merge conflicts in the normal case, e.g. by doing imports one item per
line.

In order to set up hooks, you need to execute these commands:

.. code:: bash

   # Where python is the one you use with Nuitka, this then gets all
   # development requirements, can be full PATH.
   python -m pip install -r requirements-devel.txt
   python ./misc/install-git-hooks.py

These commands will make sure that the ``autoformat-nuitka-source`` is
run on every staged file content at the time you do the commit. For C
files, it may complain unavailability of ``clang-format``, follow it's
advice. You may call the above tool at all times, without arguments to
format call Nuitka source code.

Should you encounter problems with applying the changes to the checked
out file, you can always execute it with ``COMMIT_UNCHECKED=1``
environment set.

*********************
 Coding Rules Python
*********************

These rules should generally be adhered when working on Nuitka code.
It's not library code and it's optimized for readability, and avoids all
performance optimization for itself.

Tool to format
==============

There is a tool ``bin/autoformat-nuitka-source`` which is to apply
automatic formatting to code as much as possible. It uses ``black``
(internally) for consistent code formatting. The imports are sorted with
``isort`` for proper order.

The tool (mostly ``black`` and ``isort``) encodes all formatting rules,
and makes the decisions for us. The idea being that we can focus on
actual code and do not have to care as much about other things. It also
deals with Windows new lines, trailing space, etc. and even sorts PyLint
disable statements.

Identifiers
===========

Classes
-------

Classes are camel case with leading upper case. Functions and methods
are with leading verb in lower case, but also camel case. Variables and
arguments are lower case with ``_`` as a separator.

.. code:: python

   class SomeClass:
       def doSomething(some_parameter):
           some_var = ("foo", "bar")

Base classes that are abstract have their name end with ``Base``, so
that a meta class can use that convention, and readers immediately know,
that it will not be instantiated like that.

Functions
---------

Function calls use keyword argument preferably. These are slower in
CPython, but more readable:

.. code:: python

   getSequenceCreationCode(
       sequence_kind=sequence_kind, element_identifiers=identifiers, context=context
   )

When the names don't add much value, sequential calls can be done:

.. code:: python

   context.setLoopContinueTarget(handler_start_target)

Here, ``setLoopContinueTarget`` will be so well known that the reader is
expected to know the argument names and their meaning, but it would be
still better to add them. But in this instance, the variable name
already indicates that it is.

Module/Package Names
--------------------

Normal modules are named in camel case with leading upper case, because
of their role as singleton classes. The difference between a module and
a class is small enough and in the source code they are also used
similarly.

For the packages, no real code is allowed in their ``__init__.py`` and
they must be lower case, like e.g. ``nuitka`` or ``codegen``. This is to
distinguish them from the modules.

Packages shall only be used to group things. In
``nuitka.code_generation`` the code generation packages are located,
while the main interface is ``nuitka.code_generation.CodeGeneration``
and may then use most of the entries as local imports.

There is no code in packages themselves. For programs, we use
``__main__`` package to carry the actual code.

Names of modules should be plurals if they contain classes. Example is
that a ``Nodes`` module that contains a ``Node`` class.

Context Managers
----------------

Names for context manages start with ``with``

In order to easily recognize that something is to be used as a context
manager, we follow a pattern of naming them ``withSomething``, to make
that easily recognized.

.. code:: python

   with withEnvironmentPathAdded(os.path.join(sys.prefix, "bin")):
       with withDirectoryChange(self.qt_datadir):
           ...

This makes these easy to recognize even in their definition.

Prefer list contractions over built-ins
=======================================

This concerns ``map``, ``filter``, and ``apply``. Usage of these
built-ins is highly discouraged within Nuitka source code. Using them is
considered worth a warning by "PyLint" e.g. "Used built-in function
'map'". We should use list contractions instead, because they are more
readable.

List contractions are a generalization for all of them. We love
readability and with Nuitka as a compiler, there won't be any
performance difference at all.

There are cases where a list contraction is faster because you can avoid
to make a function call. And there may be cases, where map is faster, if
a function must be called. These calls can be very expensive in CPython,
and if you introduce a function, just for ``map``, then it might be
slower.

But of course, Nuitka is the project to free us from what is faster and
to allow us to use what is more readable, so whatever is faster, we
don't care. We make all options equally fast and let people choose.

For Nuitka the choice is list contractions as these are more easily
changed and readable.

Look at this code examples from Python:

.. code:: python

   class A:
       def getX(self):
           return 1

       x = property(getX)


   class B(A):
       def getX(self):
           return 2


   A().x == 1  # True
   B().x == 1  # True (!)

This pretty much is what makes properties bad. One would hope ``B().x``
to be ``2``, but instead it's not changed. Because of the way properties
take the functions and not members, and because they then are not part
of the class, they cannot be overloaded without redeclaring them.

Overloading is then not at all obvious anymore. Now imagine having a
setter and only overloading the getter. How to update the property
easily?

So, that's not likable about them. And then we are also for clarity in
these internal APIs too. Properties try and hide the fact that code
needs to run and may do things. So let's not use them.

For an external API you may exactly want to hide things, but internally
that has no use, and in Nuitka, every API is internal API. One exception
may be the ``hints`` module, which will gladly use such tricks for an
easier write syntax.

****************
 Coding Rules C
****************

For the static C parts, e.g. compiled types, helper codes, the
``clang-format`` from LLVM project is used, the tool
``autoformat-nuitka-source`` does this for us.

We always have blocks for conditional statements to avoid typical
mistakes made by adding a statement to a branch, forgetting to make it a
block.

**********************
 The "git flow" model
**********************

-  The flow is used for releases and occasionally subsequent hot fixes.

   A few feature branches were used so far. It allows for quick delivery
   of fixes to both the stable and the development version, supported by
   a git plug-in, that can be installed via "apt-get install git-flow".

-  Stable (``main`` branch)

   The stable version, is expected to pass all the tests at all times
   and is fully supported. As soon as bugs are discovered, they are
   fixed as hot fixes, and then merged to develop by the "git flow"
   automatically.

-  Development (``develop`` branch)

   The future release, supposedly in almost ready for release state at
   nearly all times, but this is less strict. It is not officially
   supported, and may have problems and at times inconsistencies.
   Normally this branch is supposed to not be rebased. For severe
   problems it may be done though.

-  Factory (default feature branch)

   Code under construction. We publish commits there, that may not hold
   up in testing, and before it enters develop branch. Factory may have
   severe regressions frequently, and commits become **rebased all the
   time**, so do not base your patches on it, please prefer the
   ``develop`` branch for that, unless of course, it's about factory
   code itself.

-  Personal branches (jorj, orsiris, others as well)

   We are currently not using this, but it's an option.

-  Feature Branches

   We are not currently using these. They could be used for long lived
   changes that extend for multiple release cycles and are not ready
   yet. Currently we perform all changes in steps that can be included
   in releases or delay making those changes.

******************************
 Nuitka "git/github" Workflow
******************************

-  Forking and cloning

   You need to have git installed and GitHub account. Goto Nuitka
   repository <https://github.com/Nuitka/Nuitka> and fork the
   repository.

   To clone it to your local machine execute the following your git
   bash:

   .. code:: bash

      git clone https://github.com/your-user-name/Nuitka.git
      cd Nuitka
      git remote add upstream https://github.com/Nuitka/Nuitka.git

-  Create a Branch

   .. code:: bash

      git checkout develop
      git pull --rebase upstream
      git checkout -b feature_branch

   If you are having merge conflicts while doing the previous step, then
   check out (DON'T FORGET TO SAVE YOUR CHANGES FIRST IF ANY):
   <https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1125968/how-do-i-force-git-pull-to-overwrite-local-files>

-  In case you have an existing branch rebase it to develop

   .. code:: bash

      git fetch upstream
      git rebase upstream/develop

   Fix the merge conflicts if any and continue or skip commit if it is
   not your. Sometimes for important bug fixes, develop history gets
   rewritten. In that case, old and new commits will conflict during
   your rebase, and skipping is the best way to go.

   .. code:: bash

      git rebase --continue
      # not your commit:
      git rebase --skip

   If anything goes wrong while rebasing:

   .. code:: bash

      git rebase --abort

-  Making changes

   .. code:: bash

      git commit -a -m "Commit Message"
      git push -u origin # once, later always:
      git push

**********************************
 API Documentation and Guidelines
**********************************

There is API documentation generated with ``doxygen``, available at
`this location <https://nuitka.net/apidoc>`__ .

To ensure meaningful ``doxygen`` output, the following guidelines must
be observed when creating or updating Python source:

Use of Standard Python ``__doc__`` Strings
==========================================

Every class and every method should be documented via the standard
Python delimiters (``""" ... """``) in the usual way.

Special ``doxygen`` Anatomy of ``__doc__``
==========================================

.. note::

   We are replacing Doxygen with sphinx, this is all obsolete

-  Immediately after the leading ``"""``, and after 1 space on the same
   line, enter a brief description or title of the class or method. This
   must be 1 line and be followed by at least 1 empty line.

-  Depending on the item, choose from the following "sections" to
   describe what the item is and does.

   Each section name is coded on its own line, aligned with the leading
   ``"""`` and followed by a colon ":". Anything following the section,
   must start on a new line and be indented by 4 spaces relative to the
   section. Except for the first section (``Notes:``) after the title,
   sections need not be preceded by empty lines -- but it is good
   practice to still do that.

   -  ``Notes:`` detailed description of the item, any length.

      May contain line breaks with each new line starting aligned with
      previous one. The text will automatically be joined across line
      breaks and be reformatted in the browser.

      If you describe details for a class, you can do so **without**
      using this section header and all formatting will still work fine.
      If you however omit the ``Notes:`` for methods, then the text will
      be interpreted **as code**, be shown in an ugly monospaced font,
      and no automatic line breaks will occur in the browser.

   -  ``Args:`` positional arguments.

      Each argument then follows, starting on a new line and indented by
      4 spaces. The argument name must be followed by a colon ``:`` or
      double hash ``--``, followed by a description of arbitrary length.

      The description can be separated by line breaks.

   -  ``Kwargs:`` keyword arguments. Same rules as for args.

   -  ``Returns:`` description of what will be returned if applicable
      (any length).

   -  ``Yields:`` synonymous for ``Returns:``.

   -  ``Raises:`` name any exceptions that may be raised.

   -  ``Examples:`` specify any example code.

.. code:: python

   def foo(p1, p2, kw1=None, kw2=None):
       """This is an example method.

       Notes:
           It does one or the other indispensable things based on some parameters
           and proudly returns a dictionary.

       Args:
           p1: parameter one
           p2: parameter two

       Kwargs:
           kw1: keyword one
           kw2: keyword two

       Returns:
           A dictionary calculated from the input.

       Raises:
           ValueError, IndexError

       Examples:
           >>> foo(1, 2, kw1=3, kw2=4)
           {'a': 4, 'b': 6}
       """

*********************
 Checking the Source
*********************

The static checking for errors is currently done with ``PyLint``. In the
future, Nuitka itself will gain the ability to present its findings in a
similar way, but this is not a priority, and we are not there yet.

So, we currently use ``PyLint`` with options defined in a script.

.. code:: bash

   ./bin/check-nuitka-with-pylint

The above command is expected to give no warnings. It is also run on our
CI and we will not merge branches that do not pass.

*******************
 Running the Tests
*******************

This section describes how to run Nuitka tests.

Running all Tests
=================

The top level access to the tests is as simple as this:

.. code:: bash

   ./tests/run-tests

For fine grained control, it has the following options:

.. code::

   --skip-basic-tests    The basic tests, execute these to check if Nuitka is
                         healthy. Default is True.
   --skip-syntax-tests   The syntax tests, execute these to check if Nuitka
                         handles Syntax errors fine. Default is True.
   --skip-program-tests  The programs tests, execute these to check if Nuitka
                         handles programs, e.g. import recursions, etc. fine.
                         Default is True.
   --skip-package-tests  The packages tests, execute these to check if Nuitka
                         handles packages, e.g. import recursions, etc. fine.
                         Default is True.
   --skip-optimizations-tests
                         The optimization tests, execute these to check if
                         Nuitka does optimize certain constructs fully away.
                         Default is True.
   --skip-standalone-tests
                         The standalone tests, execute these to check if Nuitka
                         standalone mode, e.g. not referring to outside,
                         important 3rd library packages like PyQt fine. Default
                         is True.
   --skip-reflection-test
                         The reflection test compiles Nuitka with Nuitka, and
                         then Nuitka with the compile Nuitka and compares the
                         outputs. Default is True.
   --skip-cpython26-tests
                         The standard CPython2.6 test suite. Execute this for
                         all corner cases to be covered. With Python 2.7 this
                         covers exception behavior quite well. Default is True.
   --skip-cpython27-tests
                         The standard CPython2.7 test suite. Execute this for
                         all corner cases to be covered. With Python 2.6 these
                         are not run. Default is True.
   --skip-cpython32-tests
                         The standard CPython3.2 test suite. Execute this for
                         all corner cases to be covered. With Python 2.6 these
                         are not run. Default is True.
   --skip-cpython33-tests
                         The standard CPython3.3 test suite. Execute this for
                         all corner cases to be covered. With Python 2.x these
                         are not run. Default is True.
   --skip-cpython34-tests
                         The standard CPython3.4 test suite. Execute this for
                         all corner cases to be covered. With Python 2.x these
                         are not run. Default is True.
   --skip-cpython35-tests
                         The standard CPython3.5 test suite. Execute this for
                         all corner cases to be covered. With Python 2.x these
                         are not run. Default is True.
   --skip-cpython36-tests
                         The standard CPython3.6 test suite. Execute this for
                         all corner cases to be covered. With Python 2.x these
                         are not run. Default is True.
   --skip-cpython37-tests
                         The standard CPython3.7 test suite. Execute this for
                         all corner cases to be covered. With Python 2.x these
                         are not run. Default is True.
   --skip-cpython38-tests
                         The standard CPython3.8 test suite. Execute this for
                         all corner cases to be covered. With Python 2.x these
                         are not run. Default is True.
   --skip-cpython39-tests
                         The standard CPython3.9 test suite. Execute this for
                         all corner cases to be covered. With Python 2.x these
                         are not run. Default is True.
   --skip-cpython310-tests
                         The standard CPython3.10 test suite. Execute this for
                         all corner cases to be covered. With Python 2.x these
                         are not run. Default is True.
   --skip-cpython311-tests
                         The standard CPython3.11 test suite. Execute this for
                         all corner cases to be covered. With Python 2.x these
                         are not run. Default is True.
   --skip-cpython312-tests
                         The standard CPython3.12 test suite. Execute this for
                         all corner cases to be covered. With Python 2.x these
                         are not run. Default is True.
   --skip-cpython313-tests
                         The standard CPython3.13 test suite. Execute this for
                         all corner cases to be covered. With Python 2.x these
                         are not run. Default is True.
   --no-python2.6        Do not use Python 2.6 even if available on the system.
                         Default is False.
   --no-python2.7        Do not use Python 2.7 even if available on the system.
                         Default is False.
   --no-python3.4        Do not use Python 3.4 even if available on the system.
                         Default is False.
   --no-python3.5        Do not use Python 3.5 even if available on the system.
                         Default is False.
   --no-python3.6        Do not use Python 3.6 even if available on the system.
                         Default is False.
   --no-python3.7        Do not use Python 3.7 even if available on the system.
                         Default is False.
   --no-python3.8        Do not use Python 3.8 even if available on the system.
                         Default is False.
   --no-python3.9        Do not use Python 3.9 even if available on the system.
                         Default is False.
   --no-python3.10       Do not use Python 3.10 even if available on the system.
                         Default is False.
   --no-python3.11       Do not use Python 3.11 even if available on the system.
                         Default is False.
   --no-python3.12       Do not use Python 3.12 even if available on the system.
                         Default is False.
   --no-python3.13       Do not use Python 3.13 even if available on the system.
                         Default is False.
   --coverage            Make a coverage analysis, that does not really check.
                         Default is False.

You will only run the CPython test suites, if you have the submodules of
the Nuitka git repository checked out. Otherwise, these will be skipped
with a warning that they are not available.

The policy is generally, that ``./test/run-tests`` running and passing
all the tests on Linux and Windows shall be considered sufficient for a
release, but of course, depending on changes going on, that might have
to be expanded.

Basic Tests
===========

You can run the "basic" tests like this:

.. code:: bash

   ./tests/basics/run_all.py search

These tests normally give sufficient coverage to assume that a change is
correct, if these "basic" tests pass. The most important constructs and
built-ins are exercised.

To control the Python version used for testing, you can set the
``PYTHON`` environment variable to e.g. ``python3.5`` (can also be full
path), or simply execute the ``run_all.py`` script directly with the
intended version, as it is portable across all supported Python
versions, and defaults testing with the Python version is run with.

Syntax Tests
============

Then there are "syntax" tests, i.e. language constructs that need to
give a syntax error.

It sometimes so happens that Nuitka must do this itself, because the
``ast.parse`` doesn't see the problem and raises no ``SyntaxError`` of
its own. These cases are then covered by tests to make sure they work as
expected.

Using the ``global`` statement on a function argument is an example of
this. These tests make sure that the errors of Nuitka and CPython are
totally the same for this:

.. code:: bash

   ./tests/syntax/run_all.py search

Program Tests
=============

Then there are small "programs" tests, that e.g. exercise many kinds of
import tricks and are designed to reveal problems with inter-module
behavior. These can be run like this:

.. code:: bash

   ./tests/programs/run_all.py search

Generated Tests
===============

There are tests, which are generated from Jinja2 templates. They aim at
e.g. combining at types with operations, in-place or not, or large
constants. These can be run like this:

.. code:: bash

   ./tests/generated/run_all.py search

Compile Nuitka with Nuitka
==========================

And there is the "compile itself" or "reflected" test. This test makes
Nuitka compile itself and compare the resulting C++ when running
compiled to non-compiled, which helps to find in-determinism.

The test compiles every module of Nuitka into an extension module and
all of Nuitka into a single binary.

That test case also gives good coverage of the ``import`` mechanisms,
because Nuitka uses a lot of packages and imports between them.

.. code:: bash

   ./tests/reflected/compile_itself.py

*********************
 Internal/Plugin API
*********************

The documentation from the source code for both the Python and the C
parts are published as `Nuitka API <https://nuitka.net/apidoc>`__ and
arguably in a relatively bad shape as we started generating those with
Doxygen only relatively late.

.. code:: bash

   doxygen ./doc/Doxyfile
   xdg-open html

Improvements have already been implemented for plugins: The plugin base
class defined in ``PluginBase.py`` (which is used as a template for all
plugins) is fully documented in Doxygen now. The same is true for the
recently added standard plugins ``NumpyPlugin.py`` and
``TkinterPlugin.py``. These will be uploaded very soon.

Going forward, this will also happen for the remaining standard plugins.

Please find `here
<https://github.com/Nuitka/Nuitka/blob/develop/UserPlugin-Creation.rst>`__
a detailed description of how to write your own plugin.

To learn about plugin option specification consult `this document
<https://github.com/Nuitka/Nuitka/blob/develop/Using-Plugin-Options.rst>`__.

*********************************
 Working with the CPython suites
*********************************

Resetting CPython suites
========================

The CPython test suites are different branches of the same submodule.
When you update your git checkout, they will frequently become detached.
In this case, simply execute this command:

.. code:: bash

   git submodule foreach 'git fetch && git checkout $(basename $(pwd)) && \
   git reset --hard origin/$(basename $(pwd))'

Added new CPython suites
========================

When adding a test suite, for a new version, proceed like this, of
course while adapting of course the names. These are the commands used
for adding CPython313 based on the CPython312 branch.

.. code:: bash

   # Switch to a new branch.
   git checkout CPython312
   git branch CPython313
   git checkout CPython313

   # Delete all but root commit
   git reset --hard `git log --root --oneline --reverse | head -1 | cut -d' ' -f1`

   # Switch test data to upstream ones.
   rm -rf test
   cp -r ~/repos/Nuitka-references/final/Python-3.13.0/Lib/test test
   git add test

   # Update commit message to mention proper Python version.
   git commit --amend -m "Initial commit of Python tests as in 3.13.0"

   # Push to github, setting upstream for branch.
   git push -u

   # Cherry pick the removal commits from previous branches.
   git log origin/CPython312 --reverse --oneline | grep ' Removed' | cut -d' ' -f1 | xargs git cherry-pick
   # When being prompted for merge conflicts with the deleted files:
   git status | sed -n 's/deleted by them://p' | xargs git rm --ignore-unmatch x ; git cherry-pick --continue

   # Push to github, this is useful.
   git push

   # Cherry pick the first commit of 'run_all.py', the copy it from the last state, and amend the commits.
   git log --reverse origin/CPython312 --oneline -- run_all.py | head -1 | cut -d' ' -f1 | xargs git cherry-pick
   git checkout origin/CPython312 -- run_all.py
   chmod +x run_all.py
   sed -i -e 's#python3.12#python3.13#' run_all.py
   git commit --amend --no-edit run_all.py

   # Same for 'update_doctest_generated.py'
   git log --reverse origin/CPython312 --oneline -- update_doctest_generated.py | head -1 | cut -d' ' -f1 | xargs git cherry-pick
   git checkout origin/CPython312 -- update_doctest_generated.py
   chmod +x update_doctest_generated.py
   sed -i -e 's#python3.12#python3.13#' update_doctest_generated.py
   git commit --amend --no-edit update_doctest_generated.py

   # Same for .gitignore
   git log --reverse origin/CPython312 --oneline -- .gitignore | head -1 | cut -d' ' -f1 | xargs git cherry-pick
   git checkout origin/CPython312 -- .gitignore
   git commit --amend --no-edit .gitignore

   # Now cherry-pick all commits of test support, these disable network, audio, GUI, random filenames and more
   # and are crucial for deterministic outputs and non-reliance on outside stuff.
   git log --reverse origin/CPython312 --oneline -- test/support/__init__.py | tail -n +2 | cut -d' ' -f1 | xargs git cherry-pick

   git push

*********************
 Design Descriptions
*********************

These should be a lot more and contain graphics from presentations
given. It will be filled in, but not now.

Nuitka Logo
===========

The logo was submitted by "dr. Equivalent". It's source is contained in
``doc/Logo`` where 3 variants of the logo in SVG are placed.

-  Symbol only (symbol)

.. code:: rest

   .. image:: doc/images/Nuitka-Logo-Symbol.png
      :alt: Nuitka Logo

-  Text next to symbol (horizontal)

.. code:: rest

   .. image:: doc/images/Nuitka-Logo-Horizontal.png
      :alt: Nuitka Logo

-  Text beneath symbol (vertical)

.. code:: rest

   .. image:: doc/images/Nuitka-Logo-Vertical.png
      :alt: Nuitka Logo

From these logos, PNG images, and "favicons", and are derived.

The exact ImageMagick commands are in
``nuitka/tools/release/Documentation``, but are not executed each time,
the commands are also replicated here:

.. code:: bash

   convert -background none doc/Logo/Nuitka-Logo-Symbol.svg doc/images/Nuitka-Logo-Symbol.png
   convert -background none doc/Logo/Nuitka-Logo-Vertical.svg doc/images/Nuitka-Logo-Vertical.png
   convert -background none doc/Logo/Nuitka-Logo-Horizontal.svg doc/images/Nuitka-Logo-Horizontal.png

Choice of the Target Language
=============================

-  Choosing the target language was important decision. factors were:

   -  The portability of Nuitka is decided here
   -  How difficult is it to generate the code?
   -  Does the Python C-API have bindings?
   -  Is that language known?
   -  Does the language aid to find bugs?

The *decision for C11* is ultimately one for portability, general
knowledge of the language and for control over created code, e.g. being
able to edit and try that quickly.

The current status is to use pure C11. All code compiles as C11, and
also in terms of workaround to missing compiler support as C++03. This
is mostly needed, because MSVC does not support C. Naturally we are not
using any C++ features, just the allowances of C++ features that made it
into C11, which is e.g. allowing late definitions of variables.

Use of Scons internally
=======================

Nuitka does not involve Scons in its user interface at all; Scons is
purely used internally. Nuitka itself, being pure Python, will run
without any build process just fine.

Nuitka simply prepares ``<program>.build`` folders with lots of files
and tasks scons to execute the final build, after which Nuitka again
will take control and do more work as necessary.

.. note::

   When we speak of "standalone" mode, this is handled outside of Scons,
   and after it, creating the ".dist" folder. This is done in
   ``nuitka.MainControl`` module.

For interfacing to Scons, there is the module
``nuitka.build.SconsInterface`` that will support calling ``scons`` -
potentially from one of two inline copies (one for before / one for
Python 3.5 or later). These are mainly used on Windows or when using
source releases - and passing arguments to it. These arguments are
passed as ``key=value``, and decoded in the scons file of Nuitka.

The scons file is named ``SingleExe.scons`` for lack of better name.
It's really wrong now, but we have yet to find a better name. It once
expressed the intention to be used to create executables, but the same
works for modules too, as in terms of building, and to Scons, things
really are the same.

The scons file supports operation in multiple modes for many things, and
modules is just one of them. It runs outside of Nuitka process scope,
even with a different Python version potentially, so all the information
must be passed on the command line.

What follows is the (lengthy) list of arguments that the scons file
processes:

-  ``source_dir``

   Where is the generated C source code. Scons will just compile
   everything it finds there. No list of files is passed, but instead
   this directory is being scanned.

-  ``nuitka_src``

   Where do the include files and static C parts of Nuitka live. These
   provide e.g. the implementation of compiled function, generators, and
   other helper codes, this will point to where ``nuitka.build`` package
   lives normally.

-  ``module_mode``

   Build a module instead of a program.

-  ``result_base``

   This is not a full name, merely the basename for the result to be
   produced, but with path included, and the suffix comes from module or
   executable mode.

-  ``debug_mode``

   Enable debug mode, which is a mode, where Nuitka tries to help
   identify errors in itself, and will generate less optimal code. This
   also asks for warnings, and makes the build fail if there are any.
   Scons will pass different compiler options in this case.

-  ``python_debug``

   Compile and link against Python debug mode, which does assertions and
   extra checks, to identify errors, mostly related to reference
   counting. May make the build fail, if no debug build library of
   CPython is available. On Windows it is possible to install it for
   CPython3.5 or higher.

-  ``full_compat_mode``

   Full compatibility, even where it's stupid, i.e. do not provide
   information, even if available, in order to assert maximum
   compatibility. Intended to control the level of compatibility to
   absurd.

-  ``experimental_mode``

   Do things that are not yet accepted to be safe.

-  ``lto_mode``

   Make use of link time optimization of gcc compiler if available and
   known good with the compiler in question. So far, this was not found
   to make major differences.

-  ``disable_console``

   Windows subsystem mode: Disable console for windows builds.

-  ``unstripped_mode``

   Unstripped mode: Do not remove debug symbols.

-  ``clang_mode``

   Clang compiler mode, default on macOS X and FreeBSD, optional on
   Linux.

-  ``mingw_mode``

   MinGW compiler mode, optional and useful on Windows only.

-  ``standalone_mode``

   Building a standalone distribution for the binary.

-  ``show_scons``

   Show scons mode, output information about Scons operation. This will
   e.g. also output the actual compiler used, output from compilation
   process, and generally debug information relating to be build
   process.

-  ``python_prefix``

   Home of Python to be compiled against, used to locate headers and
   libraries.

-  ``target_arch``

   Target architecture to build. Only meaningful on Windows.

-  ``python_version``

   The major version of Python built against.

-  ``abiflags``

   The flags needed for the Python ABI chosen. Might be necessary to
   find the folders for Python installations on some systems.

-  ``icon_path``

   The icon to use for Windows programs if given.

Locating Modules and Packages
=============================

The search for modules used is driven by ``nuitka.importing.Importing``
module.

-  Quoting the ``nuitka.importing.Importing`` documentation:

   Locating modules and package source on disk.

   The actual import of a module would already execute code that changes
   things. Imagine a module that does ``os.system()``, it would be done
   during compilation. People often connect to databases, and these kind
   of things, at import time.

   Therefore CPython exhibits the interfaces in an ``imp`` module in
   standard library, which one can use those to know ahead of time, what
   file import would load. For us unfortunately there is nothing in
   CPython that is easily accessible and gives us this functionality for
   packages and search paths exactly like CPython does, so we implement
   here a multi step search process that is compatible.

   This approach is much safer of course and there is no loss. To
   determine if it's from the standard library, one can abuse the
   attribute ``__file__`` of the ``os`` module like it's done in
   ``isStandardLibraryPath`` of this module.

   End quoting the ``nuitka.importing.Importing`` documentation.

-  Role

   This module serves the recursion into modules and analysis if a
   module is a known one. It will give warnings for modules attempted to
   be located, but not found. These warnings are controlled by a while
   list inside the module.

The decision making and caching are located in the ``nuitka.tree``
package, in modules ``nuitka.tree.Recursion`` and
``nuitka.tree.ImportCache``. Each module is only considered once (then
cached), and we need to obey lots of user choices, e.g. to compile a
standard library or not.

Hooking for module ``import`` process
=====================================

Currently, in generated code, for every ``import`` a normal
``__import__()`` built-in call is executed. The
``nuitka/build/static_src/MetaPathBasedLoader.c`` file provides the
implementation of a ``sys.meta_path`` hook.

This meta path based importer allows us to have the Nuitka provided
module imported even when imported by non-compiled code.

.. note::

   Of course, it would make sense to compile time detect which module it
   is that is being imported and then to make it directly. At this time,
   we don't have this inter-module optimization yet, mid-term it should
   become easy to add.

Supporting ``__class__`` of Python3
===================================

In Python3 the handling of ``__class__`` and ``super`` is different from
Python2. It used to be a normal variable, and now the following things
have changed.

-  The use of the ``super`` variable name triggers the addition of a
   closure variable ``__class__``, as can be witnessed by the following
   code:

   .. code:: python

      class X:
          def f1(self):
              print(locals())

          def f2(self):
              print(locals())
              super  # Just using the name, not even calling it.


      x = X()
      x.f1()
      x.f2()

   Output is:

   .. code::

      {'self': <__main__.X object at 0x7f1773762390>''} {'self':
      <__main__.X object at 0x7f1773762390>, '__class__': <class
      '__main__.X'>}

-  This value of ``__class__`` is also available in the child functions.

-  The parser marks up code objects usage of "super". It doesn't have to
   be a call, it can also be a local variable. If the ``super`` built-in
   is assigned to another name and that is used without arguments, it
   won't work unless ``__class__`` is taken as a closure variable.

-  As can be seen in the CPython3 code, the closure value is added after
   the class creation is performed.

-  It appears, that only functions locally defined to the class are
   affected and take the closure.

This left Nuitka with the strange problem, of how to emulate that.

The solution is this:

-  Under Python3, usage of ``__class__`` as a reference in a child
   function body is mandatory. It remains that way until all variable
   names have been resolved.

-  When recognizing calls to ``super`` without arguments, make the arguments
      into variable reference to ``__class__`` and potentially ``self``
      (actually first argument name).

-  After all variables have been known, and no suspicious unresolved
   calls to anything named ``super`` are down, then unused references
   are optimized away by the normal unused closure variable.

-  Class dictionary definitions are added.

   These are special direct function calls, ready to propagate also
   "bases" and "metaclass" values, which need to be calculated outside.

   The function bodies used for classes will automatically store
   ``__class__`` as a shared local variable, if anything uses it. And if
   it's not assigned by user code, it doesn't show up in the "locals()"
   used for dictionary creation.

   Existing ``__class__`` local variable values are in fact provided as
   closure, and overridden with the built class , but they should be
   used for the closure giving, before the class is finished.

   So ``__class__`` will be local variable of the class body, until the
   class is built, then it will be the ``__class__`` itself.

Frame Stack
===========

In Python, every function, class, and module has a frame. It is created
when the scope is entered, and there is a stack of these at run time,
which becomes visible in tracebacks in case of exceptions.

The choice of Nuitka is to make this an explicit element of the node
tree, that are as such subject to optimization. In cases, where they are
not needed, they may be removed.

Consider the following code.

.. code:: python

   def f():
       if someNotRaisingCall():
           return somePotentiallyRaisingCall()
       else:
           return None

In this example, the frame is not needed for all the code, because the
condition checked wouldn't possibly raise at all. The idea is the make
the frame guard explicit and then to reduce its scope whenever possible.

So we start out with code like this one:

.. code:: python

   def f():
       with frame_guard("f"):
           if someNotRaisingCall():
               return somePotentiallyRaisingCall()
           else:
               return None

This is to be optimized into:

.. code:: python

   def f():
       if someNotRaisingCall():
           with frame_guard("f"):
               return somePotentiallyRaisingCall()
       else:
           return None

Notice how the frame guard taking is limited and may be avoided, or in
best cases, it might be removed completely. Also this will play a role
when in-lining function. The frame stack entry will then be
automatically preserved without extra care.

.. note::

   In the actual code, ``nuitka.nodes.FrameNodes.StatementsFrame`` is
   represents this as a set of statements to be guarded by a frame
   presence.

Parameter Parsing
=================

The parsing of parameters is very convoluted in Python, and doing it in
a compatible way is not that easy. This is a description of the required
process, for an easier overview.

Input
-----

The input is an argument ``tuple`` (the type is fixed), which contains
the positional arguments, and potentially an argument ``dict`` (type is
fixed as well, but could also be ``NULL``, indicating that there are no
keyword arguments.

Keyword dictionary
------------------

The keyword argument dictionary is checked first. Anything in there,
that cannot be associated, either raise an error, or is added to a
potentially given star dict argument. So there are two major cases.

-  No star dict argument: Iterate over dictionary, and assign or raise
   errors.

   This check covers extra arguments given.

-  With star dict argument: Iterate over dictionary, and assign or raise
   errors.

   Interesting case for optimization are no positional arguments, then
   no check is needed, and the keyword argument dictionary could be used
   as the star argument. Should it change, a copy is needed though.

What's noteworthy here, is that in comparison to the keywords, we can
hope that they are the same value as we use. The interning of strings
increases chances for non-compiled code to do that, esp. for short
names.

We then can do a simple ``is`` comparison and only fall back to real
string ``==`` comparisons, after all of these failed. That means more
code, but also a lot faster code in the positive case.

Argument tuple
--------------

After this completed, the argument tuple is up for processing. The first
thing it needs to do is to check if it's too many of them, and then to
complain.

For arguments in Python2, there is the possibility of them being nested,
in which case they cannot be provided in the keyword dictionary, and
merely should get picked from the argument tuple.

Otherwise, the length of the argument tuple should be checked against
its position and if possible, values should be taken from there. If it's
already set (from the keyword dictionary), raise an error instead.

SSA form for Nuitka
===================

The SSA form is critical to how optimization works. The so called trace
collections builds up traces. These are facts about how this works:

-  Assignments draw from a counter unique for the variable, which
   becomes the variable version. This happens during tree building
   phase.

-  References are associated with the version of the variable active.

   This can be a merge of branches. Trace collection does do that and
   provides nodes with the currently active trace for a variable.

The data structures used for trace collection need to be relatively
compact as the trace information can become easily much more data than
the program itself.

Every trace collection has these:

-  variable_actives

   Dictionary, where per "variable" the currently used version is. Used
   to track situations changes in branches. This is the main input for
   merge process.

-  variable_traces

   Dictionary, where "variable" and "version" form the key. The values
   are objects with or without an assignment, and a list of usages,
   which starts out empty.

   These objects have usages appended to them. In "onVariableSet", a new
   version is allocated, which gives a new object for the dictionary,
   with an empty usages list, because each write starts a new version.
   In "onVariableUsage" the version is detected from the current
   version. It may be not set yet, which means, it's a read of an
   undefined value (local variable, not a parameter name), or unknown in
   case of global variable.

   These objects may be told that their value has escaped. This should
   influence the value friend they attached to the initial assignment.
   Each usage may have a current value friend state that is different.

When merging branches of conditional statements, the merge shall apply
as follows:

-  Branches have their own collection

   Thee have potentially deviating sets of ``variable_actives``. These
   are children of an outer collections.

-  Case a) One branch only.

   For that branch a collection is performed. As usual new assignments
   generate a new version making it "active", references then related to
   these "active" versions.

   Then, when the branch is merged, for all "active" variables, it is
   considered, if that is a change related to before the branch. If it's
   not the same, a merge trace with the branch condition is created with
   the one active in the collection before that statement.

-  Case b) Two branches.

   When there are two branches, they both as are treated as above,
   except for the merge.

   When merging, a difference in active variables between the two
   branches creates the merge trace.

.. note::

   For conditional expressions, there are always only two branches. Even
   if you think you have more than one branch, you do not. It's always
   nested branches, already when it comes out of the ``ast`` parser.

Trace structure, there are different kinds of traces.

-  Initial write of the version

   There may be an initial write for each version. It can only occur at
   the start of the scope, but not later, and there is only one. This
   might be known to be "initialized" (parameter variables of functions
   are like that) or "uninitialized", or "unknown".

-  Merge of other one or two other versions

   This combines two or more previous versions. In cases of loop exits
   or entries, there are multiple branches to combine potentially. These
   branches can have vastly different properties.

-  Becoming unknown.

   When control flow escapes, e.g. for a module variable, any write can
   occur to it, and it's value cannot be trusted to be unchanged. These
   are then traced as unknown.

All traces have a base class ``ValueTraceBase`` which provides the
interface to query facts about the state of a variable in that trace.
It's e.g. of some interest, if a variable must have a value or must not.
This allows to e.g. omit checks, know what exceptions might raise.

Loop SSA
========

For loops we have the addition difficulty that we need would need to
look ahead what types a variable has at loop exit, but that is a cyclic
dependency.

Our solution is to consider the variable types at loop entry. When these
change, we drop all gained information from inside the loop. We may e.g.
think that a variable is a ``int`` or ``float``, but later recognize
that it can only be a float. Derivations from ``int`` must be discarded,
and the loop analysis restarted.

Then during the loop, we assign an incomplete loop trace shape to the
variable, which e.g. says it was an ``int`` initially and additional
type shapes, e.g. ``int or long`` are then derived. If at the end of the
loop, a type produced no new types, we know we are finished and mark the
trace as a complete loop trace.

If it is not, and next time, we have the same initial types, we add the
ones derived from this to the starting values, and see if this gives
more types.

Python Slots in Optimization
============================

Basic Slot Idea
---------------

For almost all the operations in Python, a form of overloading is
available. That is what makes it so powerful.

So when you write an expression like this one:

.. code:: python

   1.0 + something

This something will not just blindly work when it's a float, but go
through a slot mechanism, which then can be overloaded.

.. code:: python

   class SomeStrangeFloat:
       def __float__(self):
           return 3.14


   something = SomeStrangeFloat()
   # ...
   1.0 + float(something) // 4.140000000000001

Here it is the case, that this is used by user code, but more often this
is used internally. Not all types have all slots, e.g. ``list`` does not
have ``__float__`` and therefore will refuse an addition to a ``float``
value, based on that.

Another slot is working here, that we didn't mention yet, and that is
``__add__`` which for some times will be these kinds of conversions or
it will not do that kind of thing, e.g. something do hard checks, which
is why this fails to work:

.. code:: python

   [] + ()

As a deliberate choice, there is no ``__list__`` slot used. The Python
designers are aiming at solving many things with slots, but they also
accept limitations.

There are many slots that are frequently used, most often behind your
back (``__iter__``, ``__next__``, ``__lt__``, etc.). The list is large,
and tends to grow with Python releases, but it is not endless.

Representation in Nuitka
------------------------

So a slot in Nuitka typically has an owning node. We use ``__len__`` as
an example here. In the ``computeExpression`` the ``len`` node named
``ExpressionBuiltinLen`` has to defer the decision what it computes to
its argument.

.. code:: python

   def computeExpression(self, trace_collection):
       return self.subnode_value.computeExpressionLen(
           len_node=self, trace_collection=trace_collection
       )

That decision then, in the absence of any type knowledge, must be done
absolutely carefully and conservative, as could see anything executing
here.

That examples this code in ``ExpressionBase`` which every expression by
default uses:

.. code:: python

   def computeExpressionLen(self, len_node, trace_collection):
       shape = self.getValueShape()

       has_len = shape.hasShapeSlotLen()

       if has_len is False:
           return makeRaiseTypeErrorExceptionReplacementFromTemplateAndValue(
               template="object of type '%s' has no len()",
               operation="len",
               original_node=len_node,
               value_node=self,
           )
       elif has_len is True:
           iter_length = self.getIterationLength()

           if iter_length is not None:
               from .ConstantRefNodes import makeConstantRefNode

               result = makeConstantRefNode(
                   constant=int(iter_length),  # make sure to downcast long
                   source_ref=len_node.getSourceReference(),
               )

               result = wrapExpressionWithNodeSideEffects(new_node=result, old_node=self)

               return (
                   result,
                   "new_constant",
                   "Predicted 'len' result from value shape.",
               )

       self.onContentEscapes(trace_collection)

       # Any code could be run, note that.
       trace_collection.onControlFlowEscape(self)

       # Any exception may be raised.
       trace_collection.onExceptionRaiseExit(BaseException)

       return len_node, None, None

Notice how by default, known ``__len__`` but unpredictable or even
unknown if a ``__len__`` slot is there, the code indicates that its
contents and the control flow escapes (could change things behind out
back) and any exception could happen.

Other expressions can know better, e.g. for compile time constants we
can be a whole lot more certain:

.. code:: python

   def computeExpressionLen(self, len_node, trace_collection):
       return trace_collection.getCompileTimeComputationResult(
           node=len_node,
           computation=lambda: len(self.getCompileTimeConstant()),
           description="""Compile time constant len value pre-computed.""",
       )

In this case, we are using a function that will produce a concrete value
or the exception that the ``computation`` function raised. In this case,
we can let the Python interpreter that runs Nuitka do all the hard work.
This lives in ``CompileTimeConstantExpressionBase`` and is the base for
all kinds of constant values, or even built-in references like the name
``len`` itself and would be used in case of doing ``len(len)`` which
obviously gives an exception.

Other overloads do not currently exist in Nuitka, but through the
iteration length, most cases could be addressed, e.g. ``list`` nodes
typical know their element counts.

The C side
==========

When a slot is not optimized away at compile time however, we need to
generate actual code for it. We figure out what this could be by looking
at the original CPython implementation.

.. code:: C

   PyObject *builtin_len(PyObject *self, PyObject *v) {
       Py_ssize_t res;

       res = PyObject_Size(v);
       if (res < 0 && PyErr_Occurred())
           return NULL;
       return PyInt_FromSsize_t(res);
   }

We find a pointer to ``PyObject_Size`` which is a generic Python C/API
function used in the ``builtin_len`` implementation:

.. code:: C

   Py_ssize_t PyObject_Size(PyObject *o) {
       PySequenceMethods *m;

       if (o == NULL) {
           null_error();
           return -1;
       }

       m = o->ob_type->tp_as_sequence;
       if (m && m->sq_length)
           return m->sq_length(o);

       return PyMapping_Size(o);
   }

On the C level, every Python object (the ``PyObject *``) as a type named
``ob_type`` and most of its elements are slots. Sometimes they form a
group, here ``tp_as_sequence`` and then it may or may not contain a
function. This one is tried in preference. Then, if that fails, next up
the mapping size is tried.

.. code:: C

   Py_ssize_t PyMapping_Size(PyObject *o) {
       PyMappingMethods *m;

       if (o == NULL) {
           null_error();
           return -1;
       }

       m = o->ob_type->tp_as_mapping;
       if (m && m->mp_length)
           return m->mp_length(o);

       type_error("object of type '%.200s' has no len()", o);
       return -1;
   }

This is the same principle, except with ``tp_as_mapping`` and
``mp_length`` used.

So from this, we can tell how ``len`` gets at what could be a Python
class ``__len__`` or other built-in types.

In principle, every slot needs to be dealt with in Nuitka, and it is
assumed that currently all slots are supported on at least a very
defensive level, to avoid unnoticed escapes of control flow.

Built-in call optimization
==========================

For calls to built-in names, there is typically a function in Python
that delegates to the type constructor (e.g. when we talk about ``int``
that just creates an object passing the arguments of the call) or its
own special implementation as we saw with the ``len``.

For each built-in called, we have a specialized node, that presents to
optimization the actions of the built-in. What are the impact, what are
the results. We have seen the resulting example for ``len`` above, but
how do we get there.

In Python, built-in names are used only if there is no module level
variable of the name, and of course no local variable of that name.

Therefore, optimization of a built-in name is only done if it turns out
the actually assigned in other code, and then when the call comes,
arguments are checked and a relatively static node is created.

Code Generation towards C
=========================

Currently, Nuitka uses Pure C and no C++ patterns at all. The use of C11
requires on some platforms to compile the C11 using a C++ compiler,
which works relatively well, but also limits the amount of C11 that can
be used.

Exceptions
----------

To handle and work with exceptions, every construct that can raise has
either a ``bool`` or ``int`` return code or ``PyObject *`` with ``NULL``
return value. This is very much in line with that the Python C-API does.

Every helper function that contains code that might raise needs these
variables. After a failed call, our variant of ``PyErr_Fetch`` called
``FETCH_ERROR_OCCURRED_STATE`` must be used to catch the defined error,
unless some quick exception cases apply. The quick exception means,
``NULL`` return from C-API without a set exception means e.g.
``StopIteration``.

As an optimization, functions that raise exceptions, but are known not
to do so, for whatever reason, could only be asserted to not do so.

Statement Temporary Variables
-----------------------------

For statements and larger constructs the context object track temporary
values, that represent references. For some, these should be released at
the end of the statement, or they represent a leak.

The larger scope temporary variables, are tracked in the function or
module context, where they are supposed to have explicit ``del`` to
release their references.

Local Variables Storage
-----------------------

Closure variables taken are to be released when the function object is
later destroyed. For in-lined calls, variables are just passed, and it
does not become an issue to release anything.

For function exit, owned variables, local or shared to other functions,
must be released. This cannot be a ``del`` operation, as it also
involves setting a value, which would be wrong for shared variables (and
wasteful to local variables, as that would be its last usage). Therefore
we need a special operation that simply releases the reference to the
cell or object variable.

Exit Targets
------------

Each error or other exit releases statement temporary values and then
executes a ``goto`` to the exit target. These targets need to be setup.
The ``try``/``except`` will e.g. catch error exits.

Other exits are ``continue``, ``break``, and ``return`` exits. They all
work alike.

Generally, the exits stack of with constructs that need to register
themselves for some exit types. A loop e.g. registers the ``continue``
exit, and a contained ``try``/``finally`` too, so it can execute the
final code should it be needed.

Frames
------

Frames are containers for variable declarations and cleanups. As such,
frames provide error exits and success exits, which remove the frame
from the frame stack, and then proceed to the parent exit.

With the use of non ``PyObject **`` C types, but frame exception exits,
the need to convert those types becomes apparent. Exceptions should
still resolve the C version. When using different C types at frame
exception exits, there is a need to trace the active type, so it can be
used in the correct form.

Abortive Statements
-------------------

The way ``try``/``finally`` is handled, copies of the ``finally`` block
are made, and optimized independently for each abort method. The ones
there are of course, ``return``, ``continue``, and ``break``, but also
implicit and explicit ``raise`` of an exception.

Code trailing an abortive statement can be discarded, and the control
flow will follow these "exits".

Constant Preparation
====================

Early versions of Nuitka, created all constants for the whole program
for ready access to generated code, before the program launches. It did
so in a single file, but that approach didn't scale well.

Problems were

-  Even unused code contributed to start-up time, this can become a lot
   for large programs, especially in standalone mode.

-  The massive amount of constant creation codes gave backend C
   compilers a much harder time than necessary to analyse it all at
   once.

The current approach is as follows. Code generation detects constants
used in only one module, and declared ``static`` there, if the module is
the only user, or ``extern`` if it is not. Some values are forced to be
global, as they are used pre-main or in helpers.

These ``extern`` values are globally created before anything is used.
The ``static`` values are created when the module is loaded, i.e.
something did import it.

We trace used constants per module, and for nested ones, we also
associate them. The global constants code is special in that it can only
use ``static`` for nested values it exclusively uses, and has to export
values that others use.

Language Conversions to make things simpler
===========================================

There are some cases, where the Python language has things that can in
fact be expressed in a simpler or more general way, and where we choose
to do that at either tree building or optimization time.

The ``assert`` statement
------------------------

The ``assert`` statement is a special statement in Python, allowed by
the syntax. It has two forms, with and without a second argument. The
later is probably less known, as is the fact that raise statements can
have multiple arguments too.

The handling in Nuitka is:

.. code:: python

   assert value
   # Absolutely the same as:
   if not value:
       raise AssertionError

.. code:: python

   assert value, raise_arg
   # Absolutely the same as:
   if not value:
       raise AssertionError(raise_arg)

This makes assertions absolutely the same as a raise exception in a
conditional statement.

This transformation is performed at tree building already, so Nuitka
never knows about ``assert`` as an element and standard optimizations
apply. If e.g. the truth value of the assertion can be predicted, the
conditional statement will have the branch statically executed or
removed.

The "comparison chain" expressions
----------------------------------

In Nuitka we have the concept of an outline, and therefore we can make
the following re-formulation instead:

.. code:: python

   a < b() > c < d


   def _comparison_chain():  # So called "outline" function
       tmp_a = a
       tmp_b = b()

       tmp = tmp_a < tmp_b

       if not tmp:
           return tmp

       del tmp_a
       tmp_c = c

       tmp = tmp_b > tmp_c

       if not tmp:
           return tmp

       del tmp_b

       return tmp_c < d


   _comparison_chain()

This transformation is performed at tree building already. The temporary
variables keep the value for the use of the same expression. Only the
last expression needs no temporary variable to keep it.

What we got from this, is making the checks of the comparison chain
explicit and comparisons in Nuitka to be internally always about two
operands only.

The ``execfile`` built-in
-------------------------

Handling is:

.. code:: python

   execfile(filename)
   # Basically the same as:
   exec(compile(open(filename).read()), filename, "exec")

.. note::

   This allows optimizations to discover the file opening nature easily
   and apply file embedding or whatever we will have there one day.

This transformation is performed when the ``execfile`` built-in is
detected as such during optimization.

Generator expressions with ``yield``
------------------------------------

These are converted at tree building time into a generator function body
that yields from the iterator given, which is the put into a for loop to
iterate, created a lambda function of and then called with the first
iterator.

That eliminates the generator expression for this case. It's a bizarre
construct and with this trick needs no special code generation.

This is a complex example, demonstrating multiple cases of yield in
unexpected cases:

.. code:: python

   x = ((yield i) for i in (1, 2) if not (yield))
   # Basically the same as:
   def x():
       for i in (1, 2):
           if not (yield):
               yield (yield i)

Function Decorators
-------------------

When one learns about decorators, you see that:

.. code:: python

   @decorator
   def function():
       pass


   # Is basically the same as:
   def function():
       pass


   function = decorator(function)

The only difference is the assignment to function. In the ``@decorator``
case, if the decorator fails with an exception, the name ``function`` is
not assigned yet, but kept in a temporary variable.

Therefore in Nuitka this assignment is more similar to that of a lambda
expression, where the assignment to the name is only at the end, which
also has the extra benefit of not treating real function and lambda
functions any different.

This removes the need for optimization and code generation to support
decorators at all. And it should make the two variants optimize equally
well.

Functions nested arguments
--------------------------

Nested arguments are a Python2 only feature supported by Nuitka.
Consider this example:

.. code:: python

   def function(a, (b, c)):
       return a, b, c

We solve this, by kind of wrapping the function with another function
that does the unpacking and gives the errors that come from this:

.. code:: python

   def function(a, _1):
       def _tmp(a, b, c):
           return a, b, c

       a, b = _1
       return _tmp(a, b, c)

The ``.1`` is the variable name used by CPython internally, and actually
works if you use keyword arguments via star dictionary. So this is very
compatible and actually the right kind of re-formulation, but it removes
the need from the code that does parameter parsing to deal with these.

Obviously, there is no frame for ``_tmp``, just one for ``function`` and
we do not use local variables, but temporary functions.

In-place Assignments
--------------------

In-place assignments are re-formulated to an expression using temporary
variables.

These are not as much a reformulation of ``+=`` to ``+``, but instead
one which makes it explicit that the assign target may change its value.

.. code:: python

   a += b

.. code:: python

   _tmp = a.__iadd__(b)

   if a is not _tmp:
       a = _tmp

Using ``__iadd__`` here to express that for the ``+``, the in-place
variant ``iadd`` is used instead. The ``is`` check may be optimized away
depending on type and value knowledge later on.

Complex Assignments
-------------------

Complex assignments are defined as those with multiple targets to assign
from a single source and are re-formulated to such using a temporary
variable and multiple simple assignments instead.

.. code:: python

   a = b = c

.. code:: python

   _tmp = c
   a = _tmp
   b = _tmp
   del _tmp

This is possible, because in Python, if one assignment fails, it can
just be interrupted, so in fact, they are sequential, and all that is
required is to not calculate ``c`` twice, which the temporary variable
takes care of. Were ``b`` a more complex expression, e.g.
``b.some_attribute`` that might raise an exception, ``a`` would still be
assigned.

Unpacking Assignments
---------------------

Unpacking assignments are re-formulated to use temporary variables as
well.

.. code:: python

   a, b.attr, c[ind] = d = e, f, g = h()

Becomes this:

.. code:: python

   _tmp = h()

   _iter1 = iter(_tmp)
   _tmp1 = unpack(_iter1, 3)
   _tmp2 = unpack(_iter1, 3)
   _tmp3 = unpack(_iter1, 3)
   unpack_check(_iter1)
   a = _tmp1
   b.attr = _tmp2
   c[ind] = _tmp3
   d = _tmp
   _iter2 = iter(_tmp)
   _tmp4 = unpack(_iter2, 3)
   _tmp5 = unpack(_iter2, 3)
   _tmp6 = unpack(_iter2, 3)
   unpack_check(_iter1)
   e = _tmp4
   f = _tmp5
   g = _tmp6

That way, the unpacking is decomposed into multiple simple statements.
It will be the job of optimizations to try and remove unnecessary
unpacking, in case e.g. the source is a known tuple or list creation.

.. note::

   The ``unpack`` is a special node which is a form of ``next`` that
   will raise a ``ValueError`` when it cannot get the next value, rather
   than a ``StopIteration``. The message text contains the number of
   values to unpack, therefore the integer argument.

.. note::

   The ``unpack_check`` is a special node that raises a ``ValueError``
   exception if the iterator is not finished, i.e. there are more values
   to unpack. Again the number of values to unpack is provided to
   construct the error message.

With Statements
---------------

The ``with`` statements are re-formulated to use temporary variables as
well. The taking and calling of ``__enter__`` and ``__exit__`` with
arguments, is presented with standard operations instead. The promise to
call ``__exit__`` is fulfilled by ``try``/``except`` clause instead.

.. code:: python

   with some_context as x:
       something(x)

.. code:: python

   tmp_source = some_context

   # Actually it needs to be "special look-up" for Python2.7, so attribute
   # look-up won't be exactly what is there.
   tmp_exit = tmp_source.__exit__

   # This one must be held for the whole with statement, it may be assigned
   # or not, in our example it is. If an exception occurs when calling
   # ``__enter__``, the ``__exit__`` should not be called.
   tmp_enter_result = tmp_source.__enter__()

   # Indicator variable to know if "tmp_exit" has been called.
   tmp_indicator = False

   try:
       # Now the assignment is to be done, if there is any name for the
       # manager given, this may become multiple assignment statements and
       # even unpacking ones.
       x = tmp_enter_result

       # Then the code of the "with" block.
       something(x)
   except Exception:
       # Note: This part of the code must not set line numbers, which we
       # indicate with special source code references, which we call "internal".
       # Otherwise the line of the frame would get corrupted.

       tmp_indicator = True

       if not tmp_exit(*sys.exc_info()):
           raise
   finally:
       if not tmp_indicator:
           # Call the exit if no exception occurred with all arguments
           # as "None".
           tmp_exit(None, None, None)

.. note::

   We don't refer really to ``sys.exc_info()`` at all, instead, we have
   fast references to the current exception type, value and trace, taken
   directly from the caught exception object on the C level.

   If we had the ability to optimize ``sys.exc_info()`` to do that, we
   could use the same transformation, but right now we don't have it.

For Loops
---------

The ``for`` loops use normal assignments and handle the iterator that is
implicit in the code explicitly.

.. code:: python

   for x, y in iterable:
       if something(x):
           break
   else:
       otherwise()

This is roughly equivalent to the following code:

.. code:: python

   _iter = iter(iterable)
   _no_break_indicator = False

   while 1:
       try:
           _tmp_value = next(_iter)
       except StopIteration:
           # Set the indicator that the else branch may be executed.
           _no_break_indicator = True

           # Optimization should be able to tell that the else branch is run
           # only once.
           break

       # Normal assignment re-formulation applies to this assignment of course.
       x, y = _tmp_value
       del _tmp_value

       if something(x):
           break

   if _no_break_indicator:
       otherwise()

.. note::

   The ``_iter`` temporary variable is of course also in a
   ``try/finally`` construct, to make sure it releases after its used.
   The ``x, y`` assignment is of course subject to unpacking
   re-formulation.

   The ``try``/``except`` is detected to allow to use a variant of
   ``next`` that does not raise an exception, but to be fast check about
   the ``NULL`` return from ``next`` built-in. So no actual exception
   handling is happening in this case.

While Loops
-----------

Quoting the ``nuitka.tree.ReformulationWhileLoopStatements``
documentation:

Reformulation of while loop statements.

Loops in Nuitka have no condition attached anymore, so while loops are
re-formulated like this:

.. code:: python

   while condition:
       something()

.. code:: python

   while 1:
       if not condition:
           break

       something()

This is to totally remove the specialization of loops, with the
condition moved to the loop body in an initial conditional statement,
which contains a ``break`` statement.

That achieves, that only ``break`` statements exit the loop, and allow
for optimization to remove always true loop conditions, without
concerning code generation about it, and to detect such a situation,
consider e.g. endless loops.

.. note::

   Loop analysis (not yet done) can then work on a reduced problem
   (which ``break`` statements are executed under what conditions) and
   is then automatically very general.

   The fact that the loop body may not be entered at all, is still
   optimized, but also in the general sense. Explicit breaks at the loop
   start and loop conditions are the same.

End quoting the ``nuitka.tree.ReformulationWhileLoopStatements``
documentation:

Exception Handlers
------------------

Exception handlers in Python may assign the caught exception value to a
variable in the handler definition. And the different handlers are
represented as conditional checks on the result of comparison
operations.

.. code:: python

   try:
       block()
   except A as e:
       handlerA(e)
   except B as e:
       handlerB(e)
   else:
       handlerElse()

.. code:: python

   try:
       block()
   except:
       # These are special nodes that access the exception, and don't really
       # use the "sys" module.
       tmp_exc_type = sys.exc_info()[0]
       tmp_exc_value = sys.exc_info()[1]

       # exception_matches is a comparison operation, also a special node.
       if exception_matches(tmp_exc_type, (A,)):
           e = tmp_exc_value
           handlerA(e)
       elif exception_matches(tmp_exc_type, (B,)):
           e = tmp_exc_value
           handlerB(e)
       else:
           handlerElse()

For Python3, the assigned ``e`` variables get deleted at the end of the
handler block. Should that value be already deleted, that ``del`` does
not raise, therefore it's tolerant. This has to be done in any case, so
for Python3 it is even more complex.

.. code:: python

   try:
       block()
   except:
       # These are special nodes that access the exception, and don't really
       # use the "sys" module.
       tmp_exc_type = sys.exc_info()[0]
       tmp_exc_value = sys.exc_info()[1]

       # exception_matches is a comparison operation, also a special node.
       if exception_matches(tmp_exc_type, (A,)):
           try:
               e = tmp_exc_value
               handlerA(e)
           finally:
               del e
       elif exception_matches(tmp_exc_type, (B,)):
           try:
               e = tmp_exc_value
               handlerB(e)
           finally:
               del e
       else:
           handlerElse()

Should there be no ``else:`` branch, a default re-raise statement is
used instead.

And of course, the values of the current exception type and value, both
use special references, that access the C++ and don't go via
``sys.exc_info`` at all, nodes called ``CaughtExceptionTypeRef`` and
``CaughtExceptionValueRef``.

This means, that the different handlers and their catching run time
behavior are all explicit and reduced the branches.

Statement ``try``/``except`` with ``else``
------------------------------------------

Much like ``else`` branches of loops, an indicator variable is used to
indicate the entry into any of the exception handlers.

Therefore, the ``else`` becomes a real conditional statement in the node
tree, checking the indicator variable and guarding the execution of the
``else`` branch.

Class Creation (Python2)
------------------------

Classes in Python2 have a body that only serves to build the class
dictionary and is a normal function otherwise. This is expressed with
the following re-formulation:

.. code:: python

   # in module "SomeModule"
   # ...


   class SomeClass(SomeBase, AnotherBase):
       """ This is the class documentation. """

       some_member = 3

.. code:: python

   def _makeSomeClass():
       # The module name becomes a normal local variable too.
       __module__ = "SomeModule"

       # The doc string becomes a normal local variable.
       __doc__ = """ This is the class documentation. """

       some_member = 3

       return locals()

       # force locals to be a writable dictionary, will be optimized away, but
       # that property will stick. This is only to express, that locals(), where
       # used will be writable to.
       exec("")


   SomeClass = make_class("SomeClass", (SomeBase, AnotherBase), _makeSomeClass())

That is roughly the same, except that ``_makeSomeClass`` is *not*
visible to its child functions when it comes to closure taking, which we
cannot express in Python language at all.

Therefore, class bodies are just special function bodies that create a
dictionary for use in class creation. They don't really appear after the
tree building stage anymore. The type inference will of course have to
become able to understand ``make_class`` quite well, so it can recognize
the created class again.

Class Creation (Python3)
------------------------

In Python3, classes are a complicated way to write a function call, that
can interact with its body. The body starts with a dictionary provided
by the metaclass, so that is different, because it can ``__prepare__`` a
non-empty locals for it, which is hidden away in "prepare_class_dict"
below.

What's noteworthy, is that this dictionary, could e.g. be an
``OrderDict``. I am not sure, what ``__prepare__`` is allowed to return.

.. code:: python3

   # in module "SomeModule"
   # ...

   class SomeClass(SomeBase, AnotherBase, metaclass = SomeMetaClass):
       """ This is the class documentation. """

       some_member = 3

.. code:: python

   # Non-keyword arguments, need to be evaluated first.
   tmp_bases = (SomeBase, AnotherBase)

   # Keyword arguments go next, __metaclass__ is just one of them. In principle
   # we need to forward the others as well, but this is ignored for the sake of
   # brevity.
   tmp_metaclass = select_metaclass(tmp_bases, SomeMetaClass)

   tmp_prepared = tmp_metaclass.__prepare__("SomeClass", tmp_bases)

   # The function that creates the class dictionary. Receives temporary variables
   # to work with.
   def _makeSomeClass():
       # This has effect, currently I don't know how to express that in Python3
       # syntax, but we will have a node that does that.
       locals().replace(tmp_prepared)

       # The module name becomes a normal local variable too.
       __module__ = "SomeModule"

       # The doc string becomes a normal local variable.
       __doc__ = """ This is the class documentation. """

       some_member = 3

       # Create the class, share the potential closure variable "__class__"
       # with others.
       __class__ = tmp_metaclass("SomeClass", tmp_bases, locals())

       return __class__


   # Build and assign the class.
   SomeClass = _makeSomeClass()

Generator Expressions
---------------------

There are re-formulated as functions.

Generally they are turned into calls of function bodies with
(potentially nested) for loops:

.. code:: python

   gen = (x * 2 for x in range(8) if cond())

.. code:: python

   def _gen_helper(__iterator):
       for x in __iterator:
           if cond():
               yield x * 2


   gen = _gen_helper(range(8))

List Contractions
-----------------

The list contractions of Python2 are different from those of Python3, in
that they don't actually do any closure variable taking, and that no
function object ever exists.

.. code:: python

   list_value = [x * 2 for x in range(8) if cond()]

.. code:: python

   def _listcontr_helper(__iterator):
       result = []

       for x in __iterator:
           if cond():
               result.append(x * 2)

       return result


   list_value = _listcontr_helper(range(8))

The difference is that with Python3, the function "_listcontr_helper" is
really there and named ``<listcontraction>`` (or ``<listcomp>`` as of
Python3.7 or higher), whereas with Python2 the function is only an
outline, so it can readily access the containing name space.

Set Contractions
----------------

The set contractions of Python2.7 are like list contractions in Python3,
in that they produce an actual helper function:

.. code:: python

   set_value = {x * 2 for x in range(8) if cond()}

.. code:: python

   def _setcontr_helper(__iterator):
       result = set()

       for x in __iterator:
           if cond():
               result.add(x * 2)

       return result


   set_value = _setcontr_helper(range(8))

Dictionary Contractions
-----------------------

The dictionary contractions of are like list contractions in Python3, in
that they produce an actual helper function:

.. code:: python

   dict_value = {x: x * 2 for x in range(8) if cond()}

.. code:: python

   def _dictcontr_helper(__iterator):
       result = {}

       for x in __iterator:
           if cond():
               result[x] = x * 2

       return result


   set_value = _dictcontr_helper(range(8))

Boolean expressions ``and`` and ``or``
--------------------------------------

The short circuit operators ``or`` and ``and`` tend to be only less
general that the ``if``/``else`` expressions, but have dedicated nodes.
We used to have a re-formulation towards those, but we now do these via
dedicated nodes too.

These new nodes, present the evaluation of the left value, checking for
its truth value, and depending on it, to pick it, or use the right
value.

Simple Calls
------------

As seen below, even complex calls are simple calls. In simple calls of
Python there is still some hidden semantic going on, that we expose.

.. code:: python

   func(arg1, arg2, named1=arg3, named2=arg4)

On the C-API level there is a tuple and dictionary built. This one is
exposed:

.. code:: python

   func(*(arg1, arg2), **{"named1": arg3, "named2": arg4})

A called function will access this tuple and the dictionary to parse the
arguments, once that is also re-formulated (argument parsing), it can
then lead to simple in-lining. This way calls only have 2 arguments with
constant semantics, that fits perfectly with the C-API where it is the
same, so it is actually easier for code generation.

Although the above looks like a complex call, it actually is not. No
checks are needed for the types of the star arguments and it's directly
translated to ``PyObject_Call``.

Complex Calls
-------------

The call operator in Python allows to provide arguments in 4 forms.

-  Positional (or normal) arguments

-  Named (or keyword) arguments

-  Star list arguments

-  Star dictionary arguments

The evaluation order is precisely that. An example would be:

.. code:: python

   something(pos1, pos2, name1=named1, name2=named2, *star_list, **star_dict)

The task here is that first all the arguments are evaluated, left to
right, and then they are merged into only two, that is positional and
named arguments only. for this, the star list argument and the star
dictionary arguments, are merged with the positional and named
arguments.

What's peculiar, is that if both the star list and dictionary arguments
are present, the merging is first done for star dictionary, and only
after that for the star list argument. This makes a difference, because
in case of an error, the star argument raises first.

.. code:: python

   something(*1, **2)

This raises "TypeError: something() argument after ** must be a mapping,
not int" as opposed to a possibly more expected "TypeError: something()
argument after * must be a sequence, not int."

That doesn't matter much though, because the value is to be evaluated
first anyway, and the check is only performed afterwards. If the star
list argument calculation gives an error, this one is raised before
checking the star dictionary argument.

So, what we do, is we convert complex calls by the way of special
functions, which handle the dirty work for us. The optimization is then
tasked to do the difficult stuff. Our example becomes this:

.. code:: python

   def _complex_call(called, pos, kw, star_list_arg, star_dict_arg):
       # Raises errors in case of duplicate arguments or tmp_star_dict not
       # being a mapping.
       tmp_merged_dict = merge_star_dict_arguments(
           called, tmp_named, mapping_check(called, tmp_star_dict)
       )

       # Raises an error if tmp_star_list is not a sequence.
       tmp_pos_merged = merge_pos_arguments(called, tmp_pos, tmp_star_list)

       # On the C-API level, this is what it looks like.
       return called(*tmp_pos_merged, **tmp_merged_dict)


   returned = _complex_call(
       called=something,
       pos=(pos1, pos2),
       named={"name1": named1, "name2": named2},
       star_list_arg=star_list,
       star_dict_arg=star_dict,
   )

The call to ``_complex_call`` is be a direct function call with no
parameter parsing overhead. And the call in its end, is a special call
operation, which relates to the ``PyObject_Call`` C-API.

Assignment Expressions
----------------------

In Python 3.8 or higher, you assign inside expressions.

.. code:: python

   if (x := cond()):
      do_something()

this is the same as:

.. code:: python

   # Doesn't exist with that name, and it is not really taking closure variables,
   # it just shares the execution context.
   def _outline_func():
      nonlocal x
      x = cond()

      return x

   if (_outline_func()):
      do_something

When we use this outline function, we are allowed statements, even
assignments, in expressions. For optimization, they of course pose a
challenge to be removed ever, only happens when it becomes only a return
statement, but they do not cause much difficulties for code generation,
since they are transparent.

Match Statements
----------------

In Python 3.10 or higher, you can write so called ``match`` statements
like this:

.. code:: python

   match something():
       case [x] if x:
           z = 2
       case _ as y if y == x and y:
           z = 1
       case 0:
           z = 0

This is the same as

.. code:: python

   tmp_match_subject = something()

   # Indicator variable, once true, all matching stops.
   tmp_handled = False

   # First branch
   x = tmp_match_subject

   if sequence_check(x)
      if x:
         z = 2
         tmp_handled = True

   if tmp_handled is False:
      y = tmp_match_subject

      if x == y and y:
         z = 1
         tmp_handled = True

   if tmp_handled is False:
      z = 0

Print Statements
----------------

The ``print`` statement exists only in Python2. It implicitly converts
its arguments to strings before printing them. In order to make this
accessible and compile time optimized, this is made visible in the node
tree.

.. code:: python

   print arg1, "1", 1

This is in Nuitka converted so that the code generation for ``print``
doesn't do any conversions itself anymore and relies on the string
nature of its input.

.. code:: python

   print str(arg1), "1", str(1)

Only string objects are spared from the ``str`` built-in wrapper,
because that would only cause noise in optimization stage. Later
optimization can then find it unnecessary for certain arguments.

Additionally, each ``print`` may have a target, and multiple arguments,
which we break down as well for dumber code generation. The target is
evaluated first and should be a file, kept referenced throughout the
whole print statement.

.. code:: python

   print >> target_file, str(arg1), "1", str(1)

This is being reformulated to:

.. code:: python

   try:
      tmp_target = target_file

      print >>tmp_target, str(arg1), print >>tmp_target, "1", print
      >>tmp_target, str(1), print >>tmp_target

   finally:
      del tmp_target

This allows code generation to not deal with arbitrary amount of
arguments to ``print``. It also separates the newline indicator from the
rest of things, which makes sense too, having it as a special node, as
it's behavior with regards to soft-space is different of course.

And finally, for ``print`` without a target, we still assume that a
target was given, which would be ``sys.stdout`` in a rather hard-coded
way (no variable look-ups involved).

Reformulations during Optimization
==================================

Builtin ``zip`` for Python2
---------------------------

.. code:: python

   def _zip(a, b, c):  # Potentially more arguments.
      # First assign, to preserve the order of execution, the arguments might be
      # complex expressions with side effects.
      tmp_arg1 = a
      tmp_arg2 = b
      tmp_arg3 = c
      # could be more
      ...

      # Creation of iterators goes first.
      try:
         tmp_iter_1 = iter(tmp_arg1)
      except TypeError:
         raise TypeError("zip argument #1 must support iteration")
      try:
         tmp_iter_2 = iter(tmp_arg2)
      except TypeError:
         raise TypeError("zip argument #2 must support iteration")
      try:
         tmp_iter_3 = iter(tmp_arg3)
      except TypeError:
         raise TypeError("zip argument #3 must support iteration")

      # could be more
      ...

      tmp_result = []
      try:
         while 1:
            tmp_result.append(
                  (
                     next(tmp_iter_1),
                     next(tmp_iter_2),
                     next(tmp_iter_3),
                     # more arguments here ...
                  )
            )
      except StopIteration:
         pass

      return tmp_result

Builtin ``zip`` for Python3
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

.. code:: python

   for x, y, z in zip(a, b, c):
       ...

.. code:: python

   def _zip_gen_object(a, b, c, ...):
       ...
       # See Python2
       ...

      # could be more
      ...
      while 1:
           yield (
               next(tmp_iter_1),
               next(tmp_iter_2),
               next(tmp_iter_3),
               ...
           )
       except StopIteration:
           break

   for x, y, z in _zip_gen_object(a, b, c):
       ...

Builtin ``map`` for Python2
---------------------------

.. code:: python

   def _map():
       # TODO: Not done yet.
       pass

Builtin ``min``
---------------

.. code:: python

   # TODO: keyfunc (Python2/3), defaults (Python3)
   def _min(a, b, c):  # Potentially more arguments.
       tmp_arg1 = a
       tmp_arg2 = b
       tmp_arg3 = c
       # more arguments here ...

       result = tmp_arg1
       if keyfunc is None:  # can be decided during re-formulation
           tmp_key_result = keyfunc(result)
           tmp_key_candidate = keyfunc(tmp_arg2)
           if tmp_key_candidate < tmp_key_result:
               result = tmp_arg2
               tmp_key_result = tmp_key_candidate
           tmp_key_candidate = keyfunc(tmp_arg3)
           if tmp_key_candidate < tmp_key_result:
               result = tmp_arg3
               tmp_key_result = tmp_key_candidate
           # more arguments here ...
       else:
           if tmp_arg2 < result:
               result = tmp_arg2
           if tmp_arg3 < result:
               result = tmp_arg3
           # more arguments here ...

       return result

Builtin ``max``
---------------

See ``min`` just with ``>`` instead of ``<``.

Call to ``dir`` without arguments
---------------------------------

This expression is reformulated to ``locals().keys()`` for Python2, and
``list(locals.keys())`` for Python3.

Calls to functions with known signatures
----------------------------------------

As a necessary step for inlining function calls, we need to change calls
to variable references to function references.

.. code:: python

   def f(arg1, arg2):
       return some_op(arg1, arg2)


   # ... other code

   x = f(a, b + c)

In the optimization it is turned into

.. code:: python

   # ... other code

   x = lambda arg1, arg2: some_op(arg1, arg2)(a, b + c)

.. note::

   The ``lambda`` stands here for a reference to the function, rather
   than a variable reference, this is the normal forward propagation of
   values, and does not imply duplicating or moving any code at all.

At this point, we still have not resolved the actual call arguments to
the variable names, still a Python level function is created, and
called, and arguments are parsed to a tuple, and from a tuple. For
simplicity sake, we have left out keyword arguments out of the equation
for now, but they are even more costly.

So now, what we want to do, is to re-formulate the call into what we
call an outline body, which is a inline function, and that does the
parameter parsing already and contains the function code too. In this
inlining, there still is a function, but it's technically not a Python
function anymore, just something that is an expression whose value is
determined by control flow and the function call.

.. code:: python

   # ... other code


   def _f():
       tmp_arg1 = arg1
       tmp_arg2 = b + c
       return tmp_arg1 + tmp_arg2


   x = _f()

With this, a function is considered inlined, because it becomes part of
the abstract execution, and the actual code is duplicated.

The point is, that matching the signature of the function to the actual
arguments given, is pretty straight forward in many cases, but there are
two forms of complications that can happen. One is default values,
because they need to assigned or not, and the other is keyword
arguments, because they allow to reorder arguments.

Let's consider an example with default values first.

.. code:: python

   def f(arg1, arg2=some_default()):
       return some_op(arg1, arg2)


   # ... other code

   x = f(a, b + c)

Since the point, at which defaults are taken, we must execute them at
that point and make them available.

.. code:: python

   tmp_defaults = (some_default,)  # that was f.__defaults__

   # ... other code


   def _f():
       tmp_arg1 = arg1
       tmp_arg2 = tmp_defaults[0]
       return tmp_arg1 + tmp_arg2


   x = _f()

Now, one where keyword arguments are ordered the other way.

.. code:: python

   def f(arg1, arg2):
       return some_op(arg1, arg2)


   # ... other code

   x = f(arg2=b + c, arg1=a)  # "b+c" is evaluated before "a"

The solution is an extra level of temporary variables. We remember the
argument order by names and then assign parameters from it:

.. code:: python

   # ... other code


   def _f():
       tmp_given_value1 = b + c
       tmp_given_value2 = a
       tmp_arg1 = tmp_given_value2
       tmp_arg2 = tmp_given_value1
       return tmp_arg1 + tmp_arg2


   x = _f()

Obviously, optimization of Nuitka can decide, that e.g. should ``a`` or
``b+c`` not have side effects, to optimize these with standard variable
tracing away.

Nodes that serve special purposes
=================================

Try statements
--------------

In Python, there is ``try``/``except`` and ``try``/``finally``. In
Nuitka there is only a ``try``, which then has blocks to handle
exceptions, ``continue``, or ``break``, or ``return``. There is no
``else`` to this node type.

This is more low level and universal. Code for the different handlers
can be different. User provided ``finally`` blocks become copied into
the different handlers.

Releases
--------

When a function exits, the local variables are to be released. The same
applies to temporary variables used in re-formulations. These releases
cause a reference to the object to the released, but no value change.
They are typically the last use of the object in the function.

The are similar to ``del``, but make no value change. For shared
variables this effect is most visible.

Side Effects
------------

When an exception is bound to occur, and this can be determined at
compile time, Nuitka will not generate the code the leads to the
exception, but directly just raise it. But not in all cases, this is the
full thing.

Consider this code:

.. code:: python

   f(a(), 1 / 0)

The second argument will create a ``ZeroDivisionError`` exception, but
before that ``a()`` must be executed, but the call to ``f`` will never
happen and no code is needed for that, but the name look-up must still
succeed. This then leads to code that is internally like this:

.. code:: python

   f(a(), raise_ZeroDivisionError())

which is then modeled as:

.. code:: python

   side_effect(a(), f, raise_ZeroDivisionError())

where we can consider ``side_effect`` to be a function that returns the
last expression. Of course, if this is not part of another expression,
but close to statement level, side effects, can be converted to multiple
statements simply.

Another use case, is that the value of an expression can be predicted,
but that the language still requires things to happen, consider this:

.. code:: python

   a = len((f(), g()))

We can tell that ``a`` will be 2, but the call to ``f`` and ``g`` must
still be performed, so it becomes:

.. code:: python

   a = side_effects(f(), g(), 2)

Modelling side effects explicitly has the advantage of recognizing them
easily and allowing to drop the call to the tuple building and checking
its length, only to release it.

Caught Exception Type/Value References
--------------------------------------

When catching an exception, these are not directly put to
``sys.exc_info()``, but remain as mere C variables. From there, they can
be accessed with these nodes, or if published then from the thread
state.

Hard Module Imports
-------------------

These are module look-ups that don't depend on any local variable for
the module to be looked up, but with hard-coded names. These may be the
result of optimization gaining such level of certainty.

Currently they are used to represent ``sys.stdout`` usage for ``print``
statements, but other usages will follow.

Locals Dict Update Statement
----------------------------

For the ``exec`` re-formulation, we apply an explicit sync back to
locals as an explicit node. It helps us to tell the affected local
variable traces that they might be affected. It represents the bit of
``exec`` in Python2, that treats ``None`` as the locals argument as an
indication to copy back.

Optimizing Attribute Lookups into Method Calls for Built-ins types
==================================================================

The attribute lookup node ``ExpressionAttributeLookup`` represents
looking up an attribute name, that is known to be a string. That's
already a bit more special, than say what ``ExpressionBuiltinGetattr``
does for ``getattr``, where it could be any object being looked up. From
the Python syntax however, these are what gets created, as it's not
allowed in any other way. So, this is where this starts.

Then, when we are creating an attribute node with a *fixed* name, we
dispatch it to generated node classes, e.g.
``ExpressionAttributeLookupFixedAppend``. This will be the same, except
that the attribute name is hardcoded.

There are generated, such that they can have code that is special for
``.append`` lookups. In their case, it makes sense to ask the source, if
they are a ``list`` object exactly. It doesn't make sense to do this
check for names that the ``list`` does not contain. So at that stage, we
are saving both a bit of memory and time.

Should this question succeed, i.e. the expression the attribute values
is looked up upon, is known to be a ``list`` exactly, we persist this
knowledge in the also generated nodes that represent ``list.append`` and
just that. It is called ``ExpressionAttributeLookupListAppend`` and only
represents the knowledge gained so far.

We do not consider if ``ExpressionAttributeLookupFixedAppend`` is
called, or not, passed as an argument, assigned somewhere, it doesn't
matter yet, but for ``ExpressionAttributeLookupListAppend`` we know a
hell of a lot more. We know its type, we know attributes for it, say
``__name__``, as it is a compile time constant, therefore much
optimization can follow for them, and code generation can specialize
them too (not yet done).

Should these nodes then, and say this happens later after some inlining
happens be seen as called, we can then turn them into method call nodes,
checking the arguments and such, this is then
``ExpressionListOperationAppend`` and at this point, will raising errors
with wrong argument counts.

And then we have this ``ExpressionListOperationAppend`` which will
influence the tracing of ``list`` contents, i.e. it will be able to tell
the ``list`` in question is no more empty after this ``append``, and it
will be able to at least predict the last element value, truth value of
the list, etc.

******************************
 Plan to add "ctypes" support
******************************

Add interfacing to C code, so Nuitka can turn a ``ctypes`` binding into
an efficient binding as if it were written manually with Python C-API or
better.

Goals/Allowances to the task
============================

#. Goal: Must not directly use any pre-existing C/C++ language file
   headers, only generate declarations in generated C code ourselves. We
   would rather write or use tools that turn an existing a C header to
   some ``ctypes`` declarations if it needs to be, but not mix and use
   declarations from existing header code.

   .. note::

      The "cffi" interface maybe won't have the issue, but it's not
      something we need to write or test the code for.

#. Allowance: May use ``ctypes`` module at compile time to ask things
   about ``ctypes`` and its types.

#. Goal: Should make use of ``ctypes``, to e.g. not hard code in Nuitka
   what ``ctypes.c_int()`` gives on the current platform, unless there
   is a specific benefit.

#. Allowance: Not all ``ctypes`` usages must be supported immediately.

#. Goal: Try and be as general as possible.

   For the compiler, ``ctypes`` support should be hidden behind a
   generic interface of some sort. Supporting ``math`` module should be
   the same thing.

Type Inference - The Discussion
===============================

Main initial goal is to forward value knowledge. When you have ``a =
b``, that means that a and b now "alias". And if you know the value of
``b`` you can assume to know the value of ``a``. This is called
"aliasing".

When assigning ``a`` to something new, that won't change ``b`` at all.
But when an attribute is set, a method called of it, that might impact
the actual value, referenced by both. We need to understand mutable vs.
immutable though, as some things are not affected by aliasing in any
way.

.. code:: python

   a = 3
   b = a

   b += 4  # a is not changed

   a = [3]
   b = a

   b += [4]  # a is changed indeed

If we cannot tell, we must assume that ``a`` might be changed. It's
either ``b`` or what ``a`` was before. If the type is not mutable, we
can assume the aliasing to be broken up, and if it is, we can assume
both to be the same value still.

When that value is a compile time constant, we will want to push it
forward, and we do that with "(Constant) Value Propagation", which is
implemented already. We avoid too large constants, and we properly trace
value assignments, but not yet aliases.

In order to fully benefit from type knowledge, the new type system must
be able to be fully friends with existing built-in types, but for
classes to also work with it, it should not be tied to them. The
behavior of a type ``long``, ``str``, etc. ought to be implemented as
far as possible with the built-in ``long``, ``str`` at compiled time as
well.

.. note::

   This "use the real thing" concept extends beyond builtin types, e.g.
   ``ctypes.c_int()`` should also be used, but we must be aware of
   platform dependencies. The maximum size of ``ctypes.c_int`` values
   would be an example of that. Of course that may not be possible for
   everything.

   This approach has well proven itself with built-in functions already,
   where we use real built-ins where possible to make computations. We
   have the problem though that built-ins may have problems to execute
   everything with reasonable compile time cost.

Another example, consider the following code:

.. code:: python

   len("a" * 1000000000000)

To predict this code, calculating it at compile time using constant
operations, while feasible, puts an unacceptable burden on the
compilation.

Esp. we wouldn't want to produce such a huge constant and stream it, the
C++ code would become too huge. So, we need to stop the ``*`` operator
from being used at compile time and cope with reduced knowledge, already
here:

.. code:: python

   "a" * 10000000000000

Instead, we would probably say that for this expression:

-  The result is a ``str`` or a C level ``PyStringObject *``.

-  We know its length exactly, it's ``10000000000000``.

-  Can predict every of its elements when sub-scripted, sliced, etc., if
   need be, with a function we may create.

Similar is true for this horrible (in Python2) thing:

.. code:: python

   range(10000000000000)

So it's a rather general problem, this time we know:

-  The result is a ``list`` or C level ``PyListObject *``.

-  We know its length exactly, ``10000000000000``.

-  Can predict every of its elements when index, sliced, etc., if need
   be, with a function.

Again, we wouldn't want to create the list. Therefore Nuitka avoids
executing these calculation, when they result in constants larger than a
threshold of e.g. 256 elements. This concept has to be also applied to
large integers and more CPU and memory traps.

Now lets look at a more complete use case:

.. code:: python

   for x in range(10000000000000):
       doSomething()

Looking at this example, one traditional way to look at it, would be to
turn ``range`` into ``xrange``, and to note that ``x`` is unused. That
would already perform better. But really better is to notice that
``range()`` generated values are not used at all, but only the length of
the expression matters.

And even if ``x`` were used, only the ability to predict the value from
a function would be interesting, so we would use that computation
function instead of having an iteration source. Being able to predict
from a function could mean to have Python code to do it, as well as C
code to do it. Then code for the loop can be generated without any
CPython library usage at all.

.. note::

   Of course, it would only make sense where such calculations are
   "O(1)" complexity, i.e. do not require recursion like "n!" does.

The other thing is that CPython appears to at - run time - take length
hints from objects for some operations, and there it would help too, to
track length of objects, and provide it, to outside code.

Back to the original example:

.. code:: python

   len("a" * 1000000000000)

The theme here, is that when we can't compute all intermediate
expressions, and we sure can't do it in the general case. But we can
still, predict some of properties of an expression result, more or less.

Here we have ``len`` to look at an argument that we know the size of.
Great. We need to ask if there are any side effects, and if there are,
we need to maintain them of course. This is already done by existing
optimization if an operation generates an exception.

.. note::

   The optimization of ``len`` has been implemented and works for all
   kinds of container creation and ranges.

Applying this to "ctypes"
=========================

The *not so specific* problem to be solved to understand ``ctypes``
declarations is maybe as follows:

.. code:: python

   import ctypes

This leads to Nuitka in its tree to have an assignment from a
``__import__`` expression to the variable ``ctypes``. It can be
predicted by default to be a module object, and even better, it can be
known as ``ctypes`` from standard library with more or less certainty.
See the section about "Importing".

So that part is "easy", and it's what will happen. During optimization,
when the module ``__import__`` expression is examined, it should say:

-  ``ctypes`` is a module

-  ``ctypes`` is from standard library (if it is, might not be true)

-  ``ctypes`` then has code behind it, called ``ModuleFriend`` that
   knows things about it attributes, that should be asked.

The later is the generic interface, and the optimization should connect
the two, of course via package and module full names. It will need a
``ModuleFriendRegistry``, from which it can be pulled. It would be nice
if we can avoid ``ctypes`` to be loaded into Nuitka unless necessary, so
these need to be more like a plug-in, loaded only if necessary, i.e. the
user code actually uses ``ctypes``.

Coming back to the original expression, it also contains an assignment
expression, because it re-formulated to be more like this:

.. code:: python

   ctypes = __import__("ctypes")

The assigned to object, simply gets the type inferred propagated as part
of an SSA form. Ideally, we could be sure that nothing in the program
changes the variable, and therefore have only one version of that
variable.

For module variables, when the execution leaves the module to unknown
code, or unclear code, it might change the variable. Therefore, likely
we will often only assume that it could still be ``ctypes``, but also
something else.

Depending on how well we control module variable assignment, we can
decide this more of less quickly. With "compiled modules" types, the
expectation is that it's merely a quick C ``==`` comparison check. The
module friend should offer code to allow a check if it applies, for
uncertain cases.

Then when we come to uses of it:

.. code:: python

   ctypes.c_int()

At this point, using SSA, we are more of less sure, that ``ctypes`` is
at that point the module, and that we know what it's ``c_int`` attribute
is, at compile time, and what it's call result is. We will use the
module friend to help with that. It will attach knowledge about the
result of that expression during the SSA collection process.

This is more like a value forward propagation than anything else. In
fact, constant propagation should only be the special case of it, and
one design goal of Nuitka was always to cover these two cases with the
same code.

Excursion to Functions
======================

In order to decide what this means to functions and their call
boundaries, if we propagate forward, how to handle this:

.. code:: python

   def my_append(a, b):
       a.append(b)

       return a

We annotate that ``a`` is first a "unknown but defined parameter
object", then later on something that definitely has an ``append``
attribute, when returned, as otherwise an exception occurs.

The type of ``a`` changes to that after ``a.append`` look-up succeeds.
It might be many kinds of an object, but e.g. it could have a higher
probability of being a ``PyListObject``. And we would know it cannot be
a ``PyStringObject``, as that one has no ``append`` method, and would
have raised an exception therefore.

.. note::

   If classes, i.e. other types in the program, have an ``append``
   attribute, it should play a role too, there needs to be a way to
   plug-in to this decisions.

.. note::

   On the other hand, types without ``append`` attribute can be
   eliminated.

Therefore, functions through SSA provide an automatic analysis on their
return state, or return value types, or a quick way to predict return
value properties, based on input value knowledge.

So this could work:

.. code:: python

   b = my_append([], 3)

   assert b == [3]  # Could be decided now

Goal: The structure we use makes it easy to tell what ``my_append`` may
be. So, there should be a means to ask it about call results with given
type/value information. We need to be able to tell, if evaluating
``my_append`` makes sense with given parameters or not, if it does
impact the return value.

We should e.g. be able to make ``my_append`` tell, one or more of these:

-  Returns the first parameter value as return value (unless it raises
   an exception).

-  The return value has the same type as ``a`` (unless it raises an
   exception).

-  The return value has an ``append`` attribute.

-  The return value might be a ``list`` object.

-  The return value may not be a ``str`` object.

-  The function will raise if first argument has no ``append``
   attribute.

The exactness of statements may vary. But some things may be more
interesting. If e.g. the aliasing of a parameter value to the return
value is known exactly, then information about it need to all be given
up, but some can survive.

It would be nice, if ``my_append`` had sufficient information, so we
could specialize with ``list`` and ``int`` from the parameters, and then
e.g. know at least some things that it does in that case. Such
specialization would have to be decided if it makes sense. In the
alternative, it could be done for each variant anyway, as there won't be
that many of them.

Doing this "forward" analysis appears to be best suited for functions
and therefore long term. We will try it that way.

Excursion to Loops
==================

.. code:: python

   a = 1

   while 1:  # think loop: here
       b = a + 1
       a = b

       if cond():
           break

   print(a)

The handling of loops (both ``for`` and ``while`` are re-formulated to
this kind of loops with ``break`` statements) has its own problem. The
loop start and may have an assumption from before it started, that ``a``
is constant, but that is only true for the first iteration. So, we can't
pass knowledge from outside loop forward directly into the for loop
body.

So the collection for loops needs to be two pass for loops. First, to
collect assignments, and merge these into the start state, before
entering the loop body. The need to make two passes is special to loops.

For a start, it is done like this. At loop entry, all pre-existing, but
written traces, are turned into loop merges. Knowledge is not completely
removed about everything assigned or changed in the loop, but then it's
not trusted anymore.

From that basis, the ``break`` exits are analysed, and merged, building
up the post loop state, and ``continue`` exits of the loop replacing the
unknown part of the loop entry state. The loop end is considered a
``continue`` for this purpose.

Excursion to Conditions
=======================

.. code:: python

   if cond:
       x = 1
   else:
       x = 2

   b = x < 3

The above code contains a condition, and these have the problem, that
when exiting the conditional block, a merge must be done, of the ``x``
versions. It could be either one. The merge may trace the condition
under which a choice is taken. That way, we could decide pairs of traces
under the same condition.

These merges of SSA variable "versions", represent alternative values.
They pose difficulties, and might have to be reduced to commonality. In
the above example, the ``<`` operator will have to check for each
version, and then to decide that both indeed give the same result.

The trace collection tracks variable changes in conditional branches,
and then merges the existing state at conditional statement exits.

.. note::

   A branch is considered "exiting" if it is not abortive. Should it end
   in a ``raise``, ``break``, ``continue``, or ``return``, there is no
   need to merge that branch, as execution of that branch is terminated.

   Should both branches be abortive, that makes things really simple, as
   there is no need to even continue.

   Should only one branch exist, but be abortive, then no merge is
   needed, and the collection can assume after the conditional
   statement, that the branch was not taken, and continue.

When exiting both the branches, these branches must both be merged, with
their new information.

In the above case:

-  The "yes" branch knows variable ``x`` is an ``int`` of constant value
   ``1``

-  The "no" branch knows variable ``x`` is an ``int`` of constant value
   ``2``

That might be collapsed to:

-  The variable ``x`` is an integer of value in ``(1,2)``

Given this, we then should be able to pre-compute the value of this:

.. code:: python

   b = x < 3

The comparison operator can therefore decide and tell:

-  The variable ``b`` is a boolean of constant value ``True``.

Were it unable to decide, it would still be able to say:

-  The variable ``b`` is a boolean.

For conditional statements optimization, it's also noteworthy, that the
condition is known to pass or not pass the truth check, inside branches,
and in the case of non-exiting single branches, after the statement it's
not true.

We may want to take advantage of it. Consider e.g.

.. code:: python

   if type(a) is list:
       a.append(x)
   else:
       a += (x,)

In this case, the knowledge that ``a`` is a list, could be used to
generate better code and with the definite knowledge that ``a`` is of
type list. With that knowledge the ``append`` attribute call will become
the ``list`` built-in type operation.

Excursion to ``return`` statements
==================================

The ``return`` statement (like ``break``, ``continue``, ``raise``) is
"aborting" to control flow. It is always the last statement of inspected
block. When there statements to follow it, optimization will remove it
as "dead code".

If all branches of a conditional statement are "aborting", the statement
is decided "aborting" too. If a loop doesn't abort with a break, it
should be considered "aborting" too.

Excursion to ``yield`` expressions
==================================

The ``yield`` expression can be treated like a normal function call, and
as such invalidates some known constraints just as much as they do. It
executes outside code for an unknown amount of time, and then returns,
with little about the outside world known anymore, if it's accessible
from there.

Mixed Types
===========

Consider the following inside a function or module:

.. code:: python

   if cond is not None:
       a = [x for x in something() if cond(x)]
   else:
       a = ()

A programmer will often not make a difference between ``list`` and
``tuple``. In fact, using a ``tuple`` is a good way to express that
something won't be changed later, as these are mutable.

.. note::

   Better programming style, would be to use this:

   .. code:: python

      if cond is not None:
          a = tuple(x for x in something() if cond(x))
      else:
          a = ()

   People don't do it, because they dislike the performance hit
   encountered by the generator expression being used to initialize the
   tuple. But it would be more consistent, and so Nuitka is using it,
   and of course one day Nuitka ought to be able to make no difference
   in performance for it.

To Nuitka though this means, that if ``cond`` is not predictable, after
the conditional statement we may either have a ``tuple`` or a ``list``
type object in ``a``. In order to represent that without resorting to "I
know nothing about it", we need a kind of ``min``/``max`` operating
mechanism that is capable of say what is common with multiple
alternative values.

.. note::

   At this time, we don't really have that mechanism to find the
   commonality between values.

Back to "ctypes"
================

.. code:: python

   v = ctypes.c_int()

Coming back to this example, we needed to propagate ``ctypes``, then we
can propagate "something" from ``ctypes.int`` and then known what this
gives with a call and no arguments, so the walk of the nodes, and
diverse operations should be addressed by a module friend.

In case a module friend doesn't know what to do, it needs to say so by
default. This should be enforced by a base class and give a warning or
note.

Now to the interface
====================

The following is the intended interface:

-  Iteration with node methods ``computeStatement`` and
   ``computeExpression``.

   These traverse modules and functions (i.e. scopes) and visit
   everything in the order that Python executes it. The visiting object
   is ``TraceCollection`` and pass forward. Some node types, e.g.
   ``StatementConditional`` new create branch trace collections and
   handle the SSA merging at exit.

-  Replacing nodes during the visit.

   Both ``computeStatement`` and ``computeExpression`` are tasked to
   return potential replacements of themselves, together with "tags"
   (meaningless now), and a "message", used for verbose tracing.

   The replacement node of ``+`` operator, may e.g. be the pre-computed
   constant result, wrapped in side effects of the node, or the
   expression raised, again wrapped in side effects.

-  Assignments and references affect SSA.

   The SSA tree is initialized every time a scope is visited. Then
   during traversal, traces are built up. Every assignment and merge
   starts a new trace for that matter. References to a given variable
   version are traced that way.

-  Value escapes are traced too.

   When an operation hands over a value to outside code, it indicates so
   to the trace collection. This is for it to know, when e.g. a constant
   value, might be mutated meanwhile.

-  Nodes can be queried about their properties.

   There is a type shape and a value shape that each node can be asked
   about. The type shape offers methods that allow to check if certain
   operations are at all supported or not. These can always return
   ``True`` (yes), ``False`` (no), and ``None`` (cannot decide). In the
   case of the later, optimizations may not be able do much about it.
   Lets call these values "tri-state".

   There is also the value shape of a node. This can go deeper, and be
   more specific to a given node.

   The default implementation will be very pessimistic. Specific node
   types and shapes may then declare, that they e.g. have no side
   effects, will not raise for certain operations, have a known truth
   value, have a known iteration length, can predict their iteration
   values, etc.

-  Nodes are linked to certain states.

   During the collect, a variable reference, is linked to a certain
   trace state, and that can be used by parent operations.

   .. code:: python

      a = 1
      b = a + a

   In this example, the references to ``a``, can look-up the ``1`` in
   the trace, and base value shape response to ``+`` on it. For compile
   time evaluation, it may also ask ``isCompileTimeConstant()`` and if
   both nodes will respond ``True``, then "getCompileTimeConstant()"
   will return ``1``, which will be be used in computation.

   Then ``extractSideEffects()`` for the ``a`` reference will return
   ``()`` and therefore, the result ``2`` will not be wrapped.

   An alternative approach would be ``hasTypeSlotAdd()`` on the both
   nodes, and they both do, to see if the selection mechanism used by
   CPython can be used to find which types ``+`` should be used.

-  Class for module import expression ``ExpressionImportModule``.

   This one just knows that something is imported, but not how or what
   it is assigned to. It will be able in a recursive compile, to provide
   the module as an assignment source, or the module variables or
   submodules as an attribute source when referenced from a variable
   trace or in an expression.

-  Base class for module friend ``ModuleFriendBase``.

   This is intended to provide something to overload, which e.g. can
   handle ``math`` in a better way.

-  Module ``ModuleFriendRegistry``

   Provides a register function with ``name`` and instances of
   ``ValueFriendModuleBase`` to be registered. Recursed to modules
   should integrate with that too. The registry could well be done with
   a metaclass approach.

-  The module friends should each live in a module of their own.

   With a naming policy to be determined. These modules should add
   themselves via above mechanism to ``ModuleFriendRegistry`` and all
   shall be imported and register. Importing of e.g. ``ctypes`` should
   be delayed to when the friend is actually used. A meta class should
   aid this task.

   The delay will avoid unnecessary blot of the compiler at run time, if
   no such module is used. For "qt" and other complex stuff, this will
   be a must.

-  The walk should initially be single pass, and not maintain history.

   Instead optimization that needs to look at multiple things, e.g.
   "unused assignment", will look at the whole SSA collection
   afterwards.

Discussing with examples
========================

The following examples:

.. code:: python

   # Assignment, the source decides the type of the assigned expression
   a = b

   # Operator "attribute look-up", the looked up expression "ctypes" decides
   # via its trace.
   ctypes.c_int

   # Call operator, the called expressions decides with help of arguments,
   # which have been walked, before the call itself.
   called_expression_of_any_complexity()

   # import gives a module any case, and the "ModuleRegistry" may say more.
   import ctypes

   # From import need not give module, "x" decides what it is.
   from x import y

   # Operations are decided by arguments, and CPython operator rules between
   # argument states.
   a + b

The optimization is mostly performed by walking of the tree and
performing trace collection. When it encounters assignments and
references to them, it considers current state of traces and uses it for
``computeExpression``.

.. note::

   Assignments to attributes, indexes, slices, etc. will also need to
   follow the flow of ``append``, so it cannot escape attention that a
   list may be modified. Usages of ``append`` that we cannot be sure
   about, must be traced to exist, and disallow the list to be
   considered known value again.

Code Generation Impact
======================

Right now, code generation assumes that everything is a ``PyObject *``,
i.e. a Python object, and does not take knowledge of ``int`` or other
types into consideration at all, and it should remain like that for some
time to come.

Instead, ``ctypes`` value friend will be asked give ``Identifiers``,
like other codes do too. And these need to be able to convert themselves
to objects to work with the other things.

But Code Generation should no longer require that operations must be
performed on that level. Imagine e.g. the following calls:

.. code:: python

   c_call(other_c_call())

Value returned by "other_c_call()" of say ``c_int`` type, should be
possible to be fed directly into another call. That should be easy by
having a ``asIntC()`` in the identifier classes, which the ``ctypes``
Identifiers handle without conversions.

Code Generation should one day also become able to tell that all uses of
a variable have only ``c_int`` value, and use ``int`` instead of
``PyObjectLocalVariable`` more or less directly. We could consider
``PyIntLocalVariable`` of similar complexity as ``int`` after the C++
compiler performed its in-lining.

Such decisions would be prepared by finalization, which then would track
the history of values throughout a function or part of it.

Initial Implementation
======================

The basic interface will be added to *all* expressions and a node may
override it, potentially using trace collection state, as attached
during ``computeExpression``.

Goal 1 (Reached)
----------------

Initially most things will only be able to give up on about anything.
And it will be little more than a tool to do simple look-ups in a
general form. It will then be the first goal to turn the following code
into better performing one:

.. code:: python

   a = 3
   b = 7
   c = a / b
   print(c)

to:

.. code:: python

   a = 3
   b = 7
   c = 3 / 7
   print(c)

and then:

.. code:: python

   a = 3
   b = 7
   c = 0
   print(c)

and then:

.. code:: python

   a = 3
   b = 7
   c = 0
   print(0)

This depends on SSA form to be able to tell us the values of ``a``,
``b``, and ``c`` to be written to by constants, which can be forward
propagated at no cost.

Goal 2 (Reached)
----------------

The assignments to ``a``, ``b``, and ``c`` shall all become prey to
"unused" assignment analysis in the next step. They are all only
assigned to, and the assignment source has no effect, so they can be
simply dropped.

.. code:: python

   print(0)

In the SSA form, these are then assignments without references. These
assignments, can be removed if the assignment source has no side effect.
Or at least they could be made "anonymous", i.e. use a temporary
variable instead of the named one. That would have to take into account
though, that the old version still needs a release.

The most general form would first merely remove assignments that have no
impact, and leave the value as a side effect, so we arrive at this
first:

.. code:: python

   3
   7
   0
   print(0)

When applying the removal of expression only statements without effect,
this gives us:

.. code:: python

   print(0)

which is the perfect result. Doing it in one step would only be an
optimization at the cost of generalization.

In order to be able to manipulate nodes related to a variable trace, we
need to attach the nodes that did it. Consider this:

.. code:: python

   if cond():
       x = 1
   elif other():
       x = 3

   # Not using "x".
   print(0)

In the above case, the merge of the value traces, should say that ``x``
may be undefined, or one of ``1`` or ``3``, but since ``x`` is not used,
apply the "dead value" trick to each branch.

The removal of the "merge" of the 3 ``x`` versions, should exhibit that
the other versions are also only assigned to, and can be removed. These
merges of course appear as usages of the ``x`` versions.

Goal 3
------

Then third goal is to understand all of this:

.. code:: python

   def f():
       a = []

       print(a)

       for i in range(1000):
           print(a)

           a.append(i)

       return len(a)

.. note::

   There are many operations in this, and all of them should be properly
   handled, or at least ignored in safe way.

The first goal code gave us that the ``list`` has an annotation from the
assignment of ``[]`` and that it will be copied to ``a`` until the for
loop in encountered. Then it must be removed, because the ``for`` loop
somehow says so.

The ``a`` may change its value, due to the unknown attribute look-up of
it already, not even the call. The for loop must be able to say "may
change value" due to that, of course also due to the call of that
attribute too.

The code should therefore become equivalent to:

.. code:: python

   def f():
       a = []

       print([])

       for i in range(1000):
           print(a)

           a.append(i)

       return len(a)

But no other changes must occur, especially not to the ``return``
statement, it must not assume ``a`` to be constant "[]" but an unknown
``a`` instead.

With that, we would handle this code correctly and have some form
constant value propagation in place, handle loops at least correctly,
and while it is not much, it is important demonstration of the concept.

Goal 4
------

The fourth goal is to understand the following:

.. code:: python

   def f(cond):
       y = 3

       if cond:
           x = 1
       else:
           x = 2

       return x < y

In this we have a branch, and we will be required to keep track of both
the branches separately, and then to merge with the original knowledge.
After the conditional statement we will know that "x" is an "int" with
possible values in ``(1,2)``, which can be used to predict that the
return value is always ``True``.

The fourth goal will therefore be that the "ValueFriendConstantList"
knows that append changes ``a`` value, but it remains a list, and that
the size increases by one. It should provide an other value friend
"ValueFriendList" for "a" due to that.

In order to do that, such code must be considered:

.. code:: python

   a = []

   a.append(1)
   a.append(2)

   print(len(a))

It will be good, if ``len`` still knows that ``a`` is a list object, but
not the constant list anymore.

From here, work should be done to demonstrate the correctness of it with
the basic tests applied to discover undetected issues.

Fifth and optional goal: Extra bonus points for being able to track and
predict ``append`` to update the constant list in a known way. Using
``list.append`` that should be done and lead to a constant result of
``len`` being used.

The sixth and challenging goal will be to make the code generation be
impacted by the value friends types. It should have a knowledge that
``PyList_Append`` does the job of append and use ``PyList_Size`` for
``len``. The "ValueFriends" should aid the code generation too.

Last and right now optional goal will be to make ``range`` have a value
friend, that can interact with iteration of the for loop, and ``append``
of the ``list`` value friend, so it knows it's possible to iterate 5000
times, and that "a" has then after the "loop" this size, so ``len(a)``
could be predicted. For during the loop, about a the range of its length
should be known to be less than 5000. That would make the code of goal 2
completely analyzed at compile time.

Limitations for now
===================

-  Aim only for limited examples. For ``ctypes`` that means to compile
   time evaluate:

   .. code:: python

      print(ctypes.c_int(17) + ctypes.c_long(19))

   Later then call to "libc" or something else universally available,
   e.g. "strlen()" or "strcmp()" from full blown declarations of the
   callable.

-  We won't have the ability to test that optimization are actually
   performed, we will check the generated code by hand.

   With time, we will add XML based checks with "xpath" queries,
   expressed as hints, but that is some work that will be based on this
   work here. The "hints" fits into the "ValueFriends" concept nicely or
   so the hope is.

-  No inter-function optimization functions yet

   Of course, once in place, it will make the ``ctypes`` annotation even
   more usable. Using ``ctypes`` objects inside functions, while
   creating them on the module level, is therefore not immediately going
   to work.

-  No loops yet

   Loops break value propagation. For the ``ctypes`` use case, this
   won't be much of a difficulty. Due to the strangeness of the task, it
   should be tackled later on at a higher priority.

-  Not too much.

   Try and get simple things to work now. We shall see, what kinds of
   constraints really make the most sense. Understanding ``list``
   subscript/slice values e.g. is not strictly useful for much code and
   should not block us.

.. note::

   This design is not likely to be the final one.

***********************************
 How to make Features Experimental
***********************************

Every experimental feature needs a name. We have a rule to pick a name
with lower case and ``_`` as separators. An example of with would be the
name ``jinja_generated_add`` that has been used in the past.

Command Line
============

Experimental features are enabled with the command line argument

.. code:: bash

   nuitka --experimental=jinja_generated_add ...

In C code
=========

In Scons, all experimental features automatically are converted into C
defines, and can be used like this:

.. code:: C

   #ifdef _NUITKA_EXPERIMENTAL_JINJA_GENERATED_ADD
   #include "HelpersOperationGeneratedBinaryAdd.c"
   #else
   #include "HelpersOperationBinaryAdd.c"
   #endif

The C pre-processor is the only thing that makes an experimental feature
usable.

In Python
=========

You can query experimental features using ``Options.isExperimental()``
with e.g. code like this:

.. code:: python

   if Options.isExperimental("use_feature"):
       experimental_code()
   else:
       standard_code()

When to use it
==============

Often we need to keep feature in parallel because they are not finished,
or need to be tested after merge and should not break. Then we can do
code changes that will not make a difference except when the
experimental flag is given on the command line to Nuitka.

The testing of Nuitka is very heavy weight when e.g. all Python code is
compiled, and very often, it is interesting to compare behavior with and
without a change.

When to remove it
=================

When a feature becomes default, we might choose to keep the old variant
around, but normally we do not. Then we remove the ``if`` and ``#if``
checks and drop the old code.

At this time, large scale testing will have demonstrated the viability
of the code.

*******************************
 Adding dependencies to Nuitka
*******************************

First of all, there is an important distinction to make, run time or
development time. The first kind of dependency is used when Nuitka is
executing.

Adding a Run Time Dependency
============================

This is the kind of dependency that is the most scrutinized. As we want
Nuitka to run on latest greatest Python as well as relatively old ones,
we have to be very careful with these ones.

There is also a distinction of optional dependencies. Right now e.g. the
``lxml`` package is relatively optional, and Nuitka can work without it
being installed, because e.g. on some platforms it will not be easy to
do so. That bar has lifted somewhat, but it means e.g. that XML based
optimization tests are not run with all Python versions.

The list of run time dependencies is in ``requirements.txt`` and it is
for those the case, that they are not really required to be installed by
the user, consider this snippet:

.. code:: python

   # Folders to use for cache files.
   appdirs

   # Scons is the backend building tool to turn C files to binaries.
   scons

For both these dependencies, there is either an inline copy (Scons) that
we handle to use in case, if Scons is not available (in fact we have a
version that works with Python 2.6 and 2.7 still), and also the same for
appdirs and every dependency.

But since inline copies are against the rules on some platforms that
still do not contain the package, we often even have our own wrapper
which provides a minimal fallback or exposes a sane interface for the
subset of functionality that we use.

.. note::

   Therefore, please if you consider adding one of these, get in touch
   with ``@Nuitka-pushers`` first and get a green light.

Adding a Development Dependency
===============================

A typical example of a development dependency is ``black`` which is used
by our autoformat tool, and then in turn by the git pre-commit hook. It
is used to format source code, and doesn't have a role at run time of
the actual compiler code of Nuitka.

Much less strict rules apply to these in comparison to runtime
dependencies. Generally please take care that the tool must be well
maintained an available on newer Pythons. Then we can use it, no problem
normally. But if it's really big, say all of SciPy, we might want to
justify it a bit better.

The list of development dependencies is in ``requirements-devel.txt``
and it is for example like this:

.. code:: python

   # Autoformat needs this
   rstfmt == 0.0.10 ; python_version >= '3.7'

We always add the version, so that when tests run on as old versions as
Python 2.6, the installation would fail with that version, so we need to
make a version requirement. Sometimes we use older versions for Python2
than for Python3, ``Jinaj2`` being a notable candidate, but generally we
ought to avoid that. For many tools only being available for currently
3.7 or higher is good enough, esp. if they are run as development tools,
like ``autoformat-nuitka-source`` is.

**********
 Idea Bin
**********

This an area where to drop random ideas on our minds, to later sort it
out, and out it into action, which could be code changes, plan changes,
issues created, etc.

-  Debugging memory leak template, to be added to develop docs

   .. code:: python

      # nuitka-project: --follow-import-to=LeakingModule
      from LeakingModule import main
      from nuitka.tools.testing.Common import checkReferenceCount

      checkReferenceCount(main)

-  Make "SELECT_METACLASS" meta class selection transparent.

   Looking at the "SELECT_METACLASS" it should become an anonymous
   helper function. In that way, the optimization process can remove
   choices at compile time, and e.g. in-line the effect of a meta class,
   if it is known.

   This of course makes most sense, if we have the optimizations in
   place that will allow this to actually happen.

-  Keeping track of iterations

   The trace collection trace should become the place, where variables
   or values track their use state. The iterator should keep track of
   the "next()" calls made to it, so it can tell which value to given in
   that case.

   That would solve the "iteration of constants" as a side effect and it
   would allow to tell that they can be removed.

   That would mean to go back in the tree and modify it long after.

   .. code:: python

      a = iter((2, 3))
      b = next(a)
      c = next(a)
      del a

   It would be sweet if we could recognize that as:

   .. code:: python

      a = iter((2, 3))
      b = side_effect(next(a), 2)
      c = side_effect(next(a), 3)
      del a

   That trivially becomes:

   .. code:: python

      a = iter((2, 3))
      next(a)
      b = 2
      next(a)
      c = 3
      del a

   When the ``del a`` is examined at the end of scope, or due to another
   assignment to the same variable, ending the trace, we would have to
   consider of the ``next`` uses, and retrofit the information that they
   had no effect.

   .. code:: python

      a = iter((2, 3))
      b = 2
      b = 3
      del a

-  Aliasing

   Each time an assignment is made, an alias is created. A value may
   have different names.

   .. code:: python

      a = iter(range(9))
      b = a
      c = next(b)
      d = next(a)

   If we fail to detect the aliasing nature, we will calculate ``d``
   wrongly. We may incref and decref values to trace it.

   Aliasing is automatically traced already in SSA form. The ``b`` is
   assigned to version of ``a``. So, that should allow to replace it
   with this:

   .. code:: python

      a = iter(range(9))
      c = next(a)
      d = next(a)

   Which then will be properly handled.

-  Tail recursion optimization.

   Functions that return the results of calls, can be optimized. The
   Stackless Python does it already.

-  Integrate with "upx" compression.

   Calling "upx" on the created binaries, would be easy.

-  In-lining constant "exec" and "eval".

   It should be possible to re-formulate at least cases without "locals"
   or "globals" given.

   .. code:: python

      def f():
          a = 1
          b = 2

          exec("""a+=b;c=1""")

          return a, c

   Should become this here:

   .. code:: python

      def f():
          a = 1
          b = 2

          a += b  #
          c = 1  # MaybeLocalVariables for everything except known local ones.

          return a, c

   If this holds up, inlining ``exec`` should be relatively easy.

-  Original and overloaded built-ins

   This is about making things visible in the node tree. In Nuitka
   things that are not visible in the node tree tend to be wrong. We
   already pushed around information to the node tree a lot.

   Later versions, Nuitka will become able to determine it has to be the
   original built-in at compile time, then a condition that checks will
   be optimized away, together with the slow path. Or the other path, if
   it won't be. Then it will be optimized away, or if doubt exists, it
   will be correct. That is the goal.

   Right now, the change would mean to effectively disable all built-in
   call optimization, which is why we don't immediately do it.

   Making the compatible version, will also require a full listing of
   all built-ins, which is typing work merely, but not needed now. And a
   way to stop built-in optimization from optimizing built-in calls that
   it used in a wrap. Probably just some flag to indicate it when it
   visits it to skip it. That's for later.

   But should we have that both, I figure, we could not raise a
   ``RuntimeError`` error, but just do the correct thing, in all cases.
   An earlier step may raise ``RuntimeError`` error, when built-in
   module values are written to, that we don't support.

******************
 Prongs of Action
******************

In this chapter, we keep track of prongs of action currently ongoing.
This can get detailed and shows things we strive for.

Builtin optimization
====================

Definitely want to get built-in names under full control, so that
variable references to module variables do not have a twofold role.
Currently they reference the module variable and also the potential
built-in as a fallback.

In terms of generated code size and complexity for modules with many
variables and uses of them that is horrible. But ``some_var`` (normally)
cannot be a built-in and therefore needs no code to check for that each
time.

This is also critical to getting to whole program optimization. Being
certain what is what there on module level, will enable more definitely
knowledge about data flows and module interfaces.

Class Creation Overhead Reduction
=================================

This is more of a meta goal. Some work for the metaclass has already
been done, but that is Python2 only currently. Being able to to decide
built-ins and to distinguish between global only variables, and
built-ins more clearly will help this a lot.

In the end, empty classes should be able to be statically converted to
calls to ``type`` with static dictionaries. The inlining of class
creation function is also needed for this, but on Python3 cannot happen
yet.

Memory Usage at Compile Time
============================

We will need to store more and more information in the future. Getting
the tree to be tight shaped is therefore an effort, where we will be
spending time too.

The mix-ins prevent slots usage, so lets try and get rid of those. The
"children having" should become more simple and faster code. I am even
thinking of even generating code in the meta class, so it's both optimal
and doesn't need that mix-in any more. This is going to be ugly then.

Coverage Testing
================

And then there is coverage, it should be taken and merged from all
Python versions and OSes, but I never managed to merge between Windows
and Linux for unknown reasons.

Python3 Performance
===================

The Python3 lock for thread state is making it slower by a lot. I have
only experimental code that just ignores the lock, but it likely only
works on Linux, and I wonder why there is that lock in the first place.

Ignoring the locks cannot be good. But what updates that thread state
pointer ever without a thread change, and is this what ABI flags are
about in this context, are there some that allow us to ignore the locks.

An important bit would be to use a thread state once acquired for as
much as possible, currently exception helpers do not accept it as an
argument, but that ought to become an option, that way saving and
restoring an exception will be much faster, not to mention checking and
dropping non interesting, or rewriting exceptions.

Caching of Python level compilation
===================================

While the C compilation result is already cached with `ccache` and
friends now, we need to also cover our bases and save the resulting node
tree of potential expensive optimization on the module level.

*************************
 Updates for this Manual
*************************

This document is written in REST. That is an ASCII format which is
readable to human, but easily used to generate PDF or HTML documents.

You will find the current source under:
https://github.com/Nuitka/Nuitka/blob/develop/Developer_Manual.rst

And the current PDF under: https://nuitka.net/doc/Developer_Manual.pdf
