Method call in object with more than 109 parameters fails assertion in TastyPickler.

[nicolasstucki]

This issue is similar to #1542 but it manifests itself in a different place. It might have a shared fix with #1542.

object Foo {
  def foo(p1: Int, p2: Int, p3: Int, p4: Int, p5: Int, p6: Int, p7: Int, p8: Int, p9: Int, p10: Int, p11: Int, p12: Int, p13: Int, p14: Int, p15: Int, p16: Int, p17: Int, p18: Int, p19: Int, p20: Int, p21: Int, p22: Int, p23: Int, p24: Int, p25: Int, p26: Int, p27: Int, p28: Int, p29: Int, p30: Int, p31: Int, p32: Int, p33: Int, p34: Int, p35: Int, p36: Int, p37: Int, p38: Int, p39: Int, p40: Int, p41: Int, p42: Int, p43: Int, p44: Int, p45: Int, p46: Int, p47: Int, p48: Int, p49: Int, p50: Int, p51: Int, p52: Int, p53: Int, p54: Int, p55: Int, p56: Int, p57: Int, p58: Int, p59: Int, p60: Int, p61: Int, p62: Int, p63: Int, p64: Int, p65: Int, p66: Int, p67: Int, p68: Int, p69: Int, p70: Int, p71: Int, p72: Int, p73: Int, p74: Int, p75: Int, p76: Int, p77: Int, p78: Int, p79: Int, p80: Int, p81: Int, p82: Int, p83: Int, p84: Int, p85: Int, p86: Int, p87: Int, p88: Int, p89: Int, p90: Int, p91: Int, p92: Int, p93: Int, p94: Int, p95: Int, p96: Int, p97: Int, p98: Int, p99: Int, p100: Int, p101: Int, p102: Int, p103: Int, p104: Int, p105: Int, p106: Int, p107: Int, p108: Int, p109: Int): Int = 42
  foo(1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109)
}

java.lang.AssertionError: assertion failed: number 221 too large to fit in 1 bytes
    at scala.Predef$.assert(Predef.scala:165)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.core.tasty.TastyBuffer.putNat(TastyBuffer.scala:129)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.core.tasty.NameBuffer.withLength(NameBuffer.scala:48)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.core.tasty.NameBuffer.pickleName(NameBuffer.scala:66)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.core.tasty.NameBuffer$$anonfun$assemble$2.apply(NameBuffer.scala:89)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.core.tasty.NameBuffer$$anonfun$assemble$2.apply(NameBuffer.scala:86)
    at scala.collection.TraversableLike$WithFilter$$anonfun$foreach$1.apply(TraversableLike.scala:778)
    at scala.collection.mutable.LinkedHashMap.foreach(LinkedHashMap.scala:139)
    at scala.collection.TraversableLike$WithFilter.foreach(TraversableLike.scala:777)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.core.tasty.NameBuffer.assemble(NameBuffer.scala:86)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.core.tasty.TastyPickler.dotty$tools$dotc$core$tasty$TastyPickler$$lengthWithLength$1(TastyPickler.scala:36)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.core.tasty.TastyPickler.assembleParts(TastyPickler.scala:41)
    at dotty.tools.backend.jvm.GenBCodePipeline$Worker1$$anonfun$visit$1.apply(GenBCode.scala:207)
    at dotty.tools.backend.jvm.GenBCodePipeline$Worker1$$anonfun$visit$1.apply(GenBCode.scala:206)
    at scala.Option.foreach(Option.scala:257)
    at dotty.tools.backend.jvm.GenBCodePipeline$Worker1.visit(GenBCode.scala:206)
    at dotty.tools.backend.jvm.GenBCodePipeline$Worker1.run(GenBCode.scala:154)
    at dotty.tools.backend.jvm.GenBCodePipeline.buildAndSendToDisk(GenBCode.scala:358)
    at dotty.tools.backend.jvm.GenBCodePipeline.run(GenBCode.scala:324)
    at dotty.tools.backend.jvm.GenBCode.run(GenBCode.scala:56)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.core.Phases$Phase$$anonfun$runOn$1.apply(Phases.scala:276)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.core.Phases$Phase$$anonfun$runOn$1.apply(Phases.scala:274)
    at scala.collection.immutable.List.map(List.scala:273)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.core.Phases$Phase$class.runOn(Phases.scala:274)
    at dotty.tools.backend.jvm.GenBCode.runOn(GenBCode.scala:40)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.Run$$anonfun$compileUnits$1$$anonfun$apply$mcV$sp$1.apply(Run.scala:69)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.Run$$anonfun$compileUnits$1$$anonfun$apply$mcV$sp$1.apply(Run.scala:66)
    at scala.collection.IndexedSeqOptimized$class.foreach(IndexedSeqOptimized.scala:33)
    at scala.collection.mutable.ArrayOps$ofRef.foreach(ArrayOps.scala:186)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.Run$$anonfun$compileUnits$1.apply$mcV$sp(Run.scala:66)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.Run$$anonfun$compileUnits$1.apply(Run.scala:60)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.Run$$anonfun$compileUnits$1.apply(Run.scala:60)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.util.Stats$.monitorHeartBeat(Stats.scala:69)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.Run.compileUnits(Run.scala:60)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.Run.compileSources(Run.scala:57)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.Run.compile(Run.scala:41)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.Driver.doCompile(Driver.scala:26)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.Driver.process(Driver.scala:124)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.Driver.process(Driver.scala:93)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.Driver.process(Driver.scala:105)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.Driver.main(Driver.scala:132)
    at dotty.tools.dotc.Main.main(Main.scala)

[odersky]

No the reason for this is completely unrelated to #1542. Have a look at the
actual assert. It's a length field in TASTY that overflows.

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Nicolas Stucki notifications@github.com
wrote:

This issue is similar to #1542
#1542 but it manifests itself
in a different place. It might have a shared fix with #1542
#1542.

object Foo {
def foo(p1: Int, p2: Int, p3: Int, p4: Int, p5: Int, p6: Int, p7: Int, p8: Int, p9: Int, p10: Int, p11: Int, p12: Int, p13: Int, p14: Int, p15: Int, p16: Int, p17: Int, p18: Int, p19: Int, p20: Int, p21: Int, p22: Int, p23: Int, p24: Int, p25: Int, p26: Int, p27: Int, p28: Int, p29: Int, p30: Int, p31: Int, p32: Int, p33: Int, p34: Int, p35: Int, p36: Int, p37: Int, p38: Int, p39: Int, p40: Int, p41: Int, p42: Int, p43: Int, p44: Int, p45: Int, p46: Int, p47: Int, p48: Int, p49: Int, p50: Int, p51: Int, p52: Int, p53: Int, p54: Int, p55: Int, p56: Int, p57: Int, p58: Int, p59: Int, p60: Int, p61: Int, p62: Int, p63: Int, p64: Int, p65: Int, p66: Int, p67: Int, p68: Int, p69: Int, p70: Int, p71: Int, p72: Int, p73: Int, p74: Int, p75: Int, p76: Int, p77: Int, p78: Int, p79: Int, p80: Int, p81: Int, p82: Int, p83: Int, p84: Int, p85: Int, p86: Int, p87: Int, p88: Int, p89: Int, p90: Int, p91: Int, p92: Int, p93: Int, p94: Int, p95: Int, p96: Int, p97: Int, p98: Int, p99: Int, p100: Int, p101: Int, p102: Int, p103: Int, p104: Int, p105: Int, p106: Int, p107: Int, p108: Int, p109: Int): Int = 42
foo(1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109)
}

java.lang.AssertionError: assertion failed: number 221 too large to fit in 1 bytes
at scala.Predef$.assert(Predef.scala:165)
at dotty.tools.dotc.core.tasty.TastyBuffer.putNat(TastyBuffer.scala:129)
at dotty.tools.dotc.core.tasty.NameBuffer.withLength(NameBuffer.scala:48)
at dotty.tools.dotc.core.tasty.NameBuffer.pickleName(NameBuffer.scala:66)
at dotty.tools.dotc.core.tasty.NameBuffer$$anonfun$assemble$2.apply(NameBuffer.scala:89)
at dotty.tools.dotc.core.tasty.NameBuffer$$anonfun$assemble$2.apply(NameBuffer.scala:86)
at scala.collection.TraversableLike$WithFilter$$anonfun$foreach$1.apply(TraversableLike.scala:778)
at scala.collection.mutable.LinkedHashMap.foreach(LinkedHashMap.scala:139)
at scala.collection.TraversableLike$WithFilter.foreach(TraversableLike.scala:777)
at dotty.tools.dotc.core.tasty.NameBuffer.assemble(NameBuffer.scala:86)
at dotty.tools.dotc.core.tasty.TastyPickler.dotty$tools$dotc$core$tasty$TastyPickler$$lengthWithLength$1(TastyPickler.scala:36)
at dotty.tools.dotc.core.tasty.TastyPickler.assembleParts(TastyPickler.scala:41)
at dotty.tools.backend.jvm.GenBCodePipeline$Worker1$$anonfun$visit$1.apply(GenBCode.scala:207)
at dotty.tools.backend.jvm.GenBCodePipeline$Worker1$$anonfun$visit$1.apply(GenBCode.scala:206)
at scala.Option.foreach(Option.scala:257)
at dotty.tools.backend.jvm.GenBCodePipeline$Worker1.visit(GenBCode.scala:206)
at dotty.tools.backend.jvm.GenBCodePipeline$Worker1.run(GenBCode.scala:154)
at dotty.tools.backend.jvm.GenBCodePipeline.buildAndSendToDisk(GenBCode.scala:358)
at dotty.tools.backend.jvm.GenBCodePipeline.run(GenBCode.scala:324)
at dotty.tools.backend.jvm.GenBCode.run(GenBCode.scala:56)
at dotty.tools.dotc.core.Phases$Phase$$anonfun$runOn$1.apply(Phases.scala:276)
at dotty.tools.dotc.core.Phases$Phase$$anonfun$runOn$1.apply(Phases.scala:274)
at scala.collection.immutable.List.map(List.scala:273)
at dotty.tools.dotc.core.Phases$Phase$class.runOn(Phases.scala:274)
at dotty.tools.backend.jvm.GenBCode.runOn(GenBCode.scala:40)
at dotty.tools.dotc.Run$$anonfun$compileUnits$1$$anonfun$apply$mcV$sp$1.apply(Run.scala:69)
at dotty.tools.dotc.Run$$anonfun$compileUnits$1$$anonfun$apply$mcV$sp$1.apply(Run.scala:66)
at scala.collection.IndexedSeqOptimized$class.foreach(IndexedSeqOptimized.scala:33)
at scala.collection.mutable.ArrayOps$ofRef.foreach(ArrayOps.scala:186)
at dotty.tools.dotc.Run$$anonfun$compileUnits$1.apply$mcV$sp(Run.scala:66)
at dotty.tools.dotc.Run$$anonfun$compileUnits$1.apply(Run.scala:60)
at dotty.tools.dotc.Run$$anonfun$compileUnits$1.apply(Run.scala:60)
at dotty.tools.dotc.util.Stats$.monitorHeartBeat(Stats.scala:69)
at dotty.tools.dotc.Run.compileUnits(Run.scala:60)
at dotty.tools.dotc.Run.compileSources(Run.scala:57)
at dotty.tools.dotc.Run.compile(Run.scala:41)
at dotty.tools.dotc.Driver.doCompile(Driver.scala:26)
at dotty.tools.dotc.Driver.process(Driver.scala:124)
at dotty.tools.dotc.Driver.process(Driver.scala:93)
at dotty.tools.dotc.Driver.process(Driver.scala:105)
at dotty.tools.dotc.Driver.main(Driver.scala:132)
at dotty.tools.dotc.Main.main(Main.scala)

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#1544, or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAwlVi1oVetKjzLbnydg1qciYsN6huXkks5quSakgaJpZM4KHunZ
.
{"api_version":"1.0","publisher":{"api_key":"
05dde50f1d1a384dd78767c55493e4bb","name":"GitHub"},"entity":
{"external_key":"github/lampepfl/dotty","title":"
lampepfl/dotty","subtitle":"GitHub repository","main_image_url":"
https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/143418/17495839/a5054eac-5d88-
11e6-95fc-7290892c7bb5.png","avatar_image_url":"https://
cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/143418/15842166/
7c72db34-2c0b-11e6-9aed-b52498112777.png","action":{"name":"Open in
GitHub","url":"https://github.com/lampepfl/dotty"}},"
updates":{"snippets":[{"icon":"DESCRIPTION","message":"Method call with
more than 109 parameters fails assertion in TastyPickler.
(#1544)"}],"action":{"name":"View Issue","url":"https://github.
com//issues/1544"}}}

Prof. Martin Odersky
LAMP/IC, EPFL

[odersky]

More precisely, the signature of a name got longer than 128. Should be easy to fix, as the format allows for an arbitrary number of bytes for length fields.