Files
sx/issues/0158-union-struct-literal-silently-miscompiles.md
agra 1e0015d6b4 fix: union struct-literal init (issue 0158)
A plain union initialized with a struct literal (b : Overlay = .{ f = 3.14 })
silently miscompiled — it fell through the generic struct-literal path
(getStructFields returns empty for a union), building a malformed structInit
whose overlapping zero-fill clobbered the named member, so it read back 0.0
(and a type-pun read segfaulted).

lowerStructLiteral now detects a plain-union target and dispatches to a new
lowerUnionLiteral, which writes each named member into a union-sized slot via
the same lvalue resolver the u.member = v assignment path uses, then loads the
union value back. Validity: the named members must share one arm — a single
direct member, or several promoted members of the same anonymous-struct variant.
Overlapping members, members from different arms, and positional union literals
are rejected with a diagnostic (no silent last-wins); an empty .{} yields an
undefined union (matching the --- form).

specs.md updated. Regressions: examples/types/0194 (valid forms) +
examples/diagnostics/1191 (overlap rejection).
2026-06-22 09:45:17 +03:00

96 lines
4.9 KiB
Markdown

# issue 0158 — a union struct-literal `.{ member = v }` silently miscompiles (wrong value / segfault) instead of being rejected
> **RESOLVED.** Root cause: a plain `union` literal fell through the generic
> struct-literal path (`getStructFields` returns empty for a union →
> `lowerStructLiteral` built a malformed `structInit` whose overlapping
> zero-fill clobbered the named member). Fix: chose to MAKE IT WORK (vs reject) —
> `lowerStructLiteral` now detects a plain-union target and dispatches to a new
> `lowerUnionLiteral` (`src/ir/lower/stmt.zig`) that writes each named member
> into a union-sized slot via the same lvalue resolver the `u.member = v`
> assignment path uses, then loads the union value back. Validity: the named
> members must share ONE arm (a single direct member, or several promoted
> members of the same anonymous-struct variant) — naming overlapping members, or
> members from different arms, is rejected with a diagnostic (no silent
> last-wins); a positional union literal is rejected as ambiguous; `.{}` yields
> an undefined union. specs.md §Union/Initialization updated. Regression:
> `examples/types/0194-types-union-literal-init.sx` (valid forms) +
> `examples/diagnostics/1191-diagnostics-union-literal-overlap.sx` (rejection).
## Symptom
A union initialized with a **struct literal** is silently accepted by the
compiler and produces the **wrong value** — with no diagnostic.
specs.md (§Union Types → Initialization) is explicit:
> Unions must be initialized with `---` (undefined) and then assigned per-field.
So a `.{ member = v }` literal is not a valid union initializer. But instead of
rejecting it, the compiler miscompiles it:
```
uninit form (correct): 3.140000 ← a : Overlay = ---; a.f = 3.14;
literal form (wrong): 0.000000 ← b : Overlay = .{ f = 3.14 }; (should be 3.14, or an error)
```
Observed: the named member's value is dropped (reads back `0.0`). A
type-punning read after the literal (`print("{}", b.i)`) additionally
**segfaults**, indicating the literal store corrupts/zeroes the slot rather than
writing the named member — the same silent-frame-corruption class as issue 0154.
Expected: either (preferred) a clean compile-time diagnostic — "a union must be
initialized with `--- ` then assigned per-field (see specs.md); struct-literal
init is not supported for unions" — or correct lowering that stores `v` into the
named member. A silently-wrong value (and a conditional segfault) is the
forbidden silent-corruption outcome.
## Reproduction
```sx
#import "modules/std.sx";
Overlay :: union { f: f32; i: i32; }
main :: () -> i64 {
a : Overlay = ---; // spec-mandated form — correct
a.f = 3.14;
print("correct: {}\n", a.f); // 3.140000
b : Overlay = .{ f = 3.14 }; // union struct-literal — silently MISCOMPILES
print("wrong: {}\n", b.f); // 0.000000 ← bug
return 0;
}
```
(repro: `issues/0158-union-struct-literal-silently-miscompiles.sx`)
## Investigation prompt
> The sx compiler silently miscompiles a union initialized with a struct literal
> (`b : Overlay = .{ f = 3.14 }` reads back `0.0` instead of `3.14`; a
> type-punning read afterwards segfaults). Per specs.md (§Union Types →
> Initialization) unions MUST be initialized with `--- ` then assigned per-field,
> so a struct literal is not a valid union initializer — but it is currently
> accepted and miscompiled rather than diagnosed. Repro:
> `issues/0158-union-struct-literal-silently-miscompiles.sx`.
>
> Trace the struct-literal lowering path (`src/ir/lower/` — the `.struct_literal`
> arm in expr/stmt lowering, and `lowerAssignment` in `src/ir/lower/stmt.zig`
> where a `name : T = .{...}` decl is lowered). At the point the literal's target
> type is known, check whether it resolves to a **union** TypeId
> (`module.types.get(ty) == .union_type` or equivalent). Decide the intended
> behavior:
> - **Preferred (matches the spec):** emit a diagnostic via
> `self.diagnostics.addFmt(.err, span, "a union must be initialized with `--- `
> then assigned per-field; struct-literal init is not supported for unions
> (see specs.md)", .{})` and do not lower the bad store. This makes the spec
> rule enforced instead of silently violated.
> - **Alternative (if union literals are wanted later):** lower a single-member
> union literal correctly — store the one named member at offset 0 with the
> member's type/size (NOT a whole-union-sized zero/aggregate store, which is
> what currently drops the value and corrupts the slot — cf. issue 0154's
> oversized-store class). Reject a literal naming ≥2 overlapping members.
>
> Verify: `sx run` the repro — expect either a clean compile error (preferred) or
> `wrong: 3.140000`, never a silent `0.0` and never a segfault. If diagnosing,
> add a `1xxx-diagnostics-union-struct-literal-rejected` example; if lowering,
> promote the repro to a regression under `examples/types/`.