spec-memory.md defines an allocator as a procedure plus an opaque data
pointer, which reads as a function value, which check.ml refuses four ways.
None of the four is anywhere near this: `Allocator` is a `Types.t` case with
no user-writable constructor, the way `string` is a builtin ptr+len, its
procedure is a C symbol the emitter names, and every operation is an ordinary
named call that `check_call` already routes through `named_call`. The one
thing that really does need milestone 5 is a *user-written* allocator — it
wants a defn's name in value position — and that is refused by name with that
reason rather than left to come back as an unknown function.
An `Allocator` value is a pointer to the runtime's struct and never a copy of
one. That is forced, not chosen: the capability set has to be readable from
wherever a container landed, and `free-all` bumps an epoch every container
made from the allocator has to observe. A copy would give each its own epoch
and the dev trap would never fire.
Two decisions the spec left to be made here, both announced in BUILT.md:
`free-all` is retain-capacity — offset = 0, the pages stay — and handing the
pages back is `arena-destroy`, a separate operation. Zig's reset takes a mode;
Odin's arena_free_all is already retain-capacity in effect. Taking the mode
would have grown the operation table the spec froze at four. The epoch is
bumped either way, because the pages being the same does not make a container
made before the reset valid.
`context/allocator` and `context/temp` are dynamic variables with save and
restore, not extra parameters. The spec calls the allocator part of the
calling convention; the literal reading touches every signature, the FFI shim,
the dev trampolines and the reload ABI for the same observable behaviour.
`with-allocator` is its own IR node rather than a let and two calls, because
the restore has to happen on the transfer path too. A body that errors leaves
through the landing pad, and a context allocator left pointing into a region
nobody outside the body has heard of would be wrong in the break loop, which
is exactly where something is about to allocate to render a condition. The
acceptance program asserts that path by taking a restart out of a body.
The backend grew one prim, `Rt of string`: a call into the runtime's C named
by symbol, with argument and result types read off the expression nodes. The
container runtime is type-erased and therefore *is* a list of C entry points,
so one arm covers all of them rather than one arm each.
Joseph Ferano
74c6489020