cgen: fix short-circuit evaluation in asserts with || and && (#26777)#26784
Open
kbkpbot wants to merge 2 commits intovlang:masterfrom
Open
cgen: fix short-circuit evaluation in asserts with || and && (#26777)#26784kbkpbot wants to merge 2 commits intovlang:masterfrom
kbkpbot wants to merge 2 commits intovlang:masterfrom
Conversation
…6777) Fix incorrect code generation for compound OR/AND expressions in assert statements. Previously, the right side of || and && was pre-evaluated even when short-circuit evaluation should have skipped it, causing runtime errors like null pointer access. Changes: - assert.v: skip pre-evaluation of right side for || and && operators - assert.v: show '<short-circuited>' placeholder for rvalue in asserts - infix.v: respect inside_ternary flag in infix_expr_and_or_op Fixes vlang#26777
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 280e23d7d9
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".
- test_assert_and_short_circuit: now tests both short-circuit and non-short-circuit paths for && operator - test_assert_or_both_sides_need_eval: remove parent assignment so left side is false, forcing right side to be evaluated Fixes codex review comments on PR vlang#26784
JalonSolov
reviewed
Mar 29, 2026
| node.expr.right = subst_expr | ||
| // For || and && operators, do not pre-evaluate the right side | ||
| // to allow short-circuit evaluation to work correctly. | ||
| if node.expr.op !in [.logical_or, .and] { |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't this be .logical_and instead of .and?
Suggested change
| if node.expr.op !in [.logical_or, .and] { | |
| if node.expr.op !in [.logical_or, .logical_and] { |
JalonSolov
reviewed
Mar 29, 2026
| // temporary variables outside the conditional scope. | ||
| // - For &&: if left is false, right is short-circuited | ||
| // - For ||: if left is true, right is short-circuited | ||
| if node.expr.op in [.logical_or, .and] { |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't this be .logical_and instead of .and?
Suggested change
| if node.expr.op in [.logical_or, .and] { | |
| if node.expr.op in [.logical_or, .locgical_and] { |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fix incorrect code generation for compound OR/AND expressions in assert statements. Previously, the right side of || and && was pre-evaluated even when short-circuit evaluation should have skipped it, causing runtime errors like null pointer access.
Changes:
Fixes #26777