[dialyzer] Fix handling of literal records

This ticket is about records in Erlang code, and when to check the
fields against the (optional) types given when defining records.

Dialyzer operates on the Erlang Core format, where there are no trace
of records. The fix implemented is a Real Hack:

Given the new option 'dialyzer' erl_expand_records marks the line
number of records in a way that is undone by v3_core, which in turn
inserts annotations that can be recognized by Dialyzer.

1 files changed, 36 insertions, 25 deletions

diff --git a/lib/hipe/cerl/erl_types.erl b/lib/hipe/cerl/erl_types.erl
index 67661130a5..0927c17b6b 100644
--- a/lib/hipe/cerl/erl_types.erl
+++ b/lib/hipe/cerl/erl_types.erl
@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@
          t_contains_opaque/1, t_contains_opaque/2,
          t_decorate_with_opaque/3,
 	 t_elements/1,
-	 t_find_opaque_mismatch/2,
+	 t_find_opaque_mismatch/3,
          t_find_unknown_opaque/3,
 	 t_fixnum/0,
 	 t_map/2,
@@ -530,39 +530,51 @@ list_contains_opaque(List, Opaques) ->
 %% The first argument of the function is the pattern and its second
 %% argument the type we are matching against the pattern.
 
--spec t_find_opaque_mismatch(erl_type(), erl_type()) -> 'error' | {'ok', erl_type(), erl_type()}.
+-spec t_find_opaque_mismatch(erl_type(), erl_type(), [erl_type()]) ->
+                                'error' | {'ok', erl_type(), erl_type()}.
 
-t_find_opaque_mismatch(T1, T2) ->
-  t_find_opaque_mismatch(T1, T2, T2).
+t_find_opaque_mismatch(T1, T2, Opaques) ->
+  t_find_opaque_mismatch(T1, T2, T2, Opaques).
 
-t_find_opaque_mismatch(?any, _Type, _TopType) -> error;
-t_find_opaque_mismatch(?none, _Type, _TopType) -> error;
-t_find_opaque_mismatch(?list(T1, Tl1, _), ?list(T2, Tl2, _), TopType) ->
-  t_find_opaque_mismatch_ordlists([T1, Tl1], [T2, Tl2], TopType);
-t_find_opaque_mismatch(_T1, ?opaque(_) = T2, TopType) -> {ok, TopType, T2};
-t_find_opaque_mismatch(?opaque(_) = T1, _T2, TopType) ->
+t_find_opaque_mismatch(?any, _Type, _TopType, _Opaques) -> error;
+t_find_opaque_mismatch(?none, _Type, _TopType, _Opaques) -> error;
+t_find_opaque_mismatch(?list(T1, Tl1, _), ?list(T2, Tl2, _), TopType, Opaques) ->
+  t_find_opaque_mismatch_ordlists([T1, Tl1], [T2, Tl2], TopType, Opaques);
+t_find_opaque_mismatch(T1, ?opaque(_) = T2, TopType, Opaques) ->
+  case is_opaque_type(T2, Opaques) of
+    false -> {ok, TopType, T2};
+    true ->
+      t_find_opaque_mismatch(T1, t_opaque_structure(T2), TopType, Opaques)
+  end;
+t_find_opaque_mismatch(?opaque(_) = T1, T2, TopType, Opaques) ->
   %% The generated message is somewhat misleading:
-  {ok, TopType, T1};
-t_find_opaque_mismatch(?product(T1), ?product(T2), TopType) ->
-  t_find_opaque_mismatch_ordlists(T1, T2, TopType);
-t_find_opaque_mismatch(?tuple(T1, Arity, _), ?tuple(T2, Arity, _), TopType) ->
-  t_find_opaque_mismatch_ordlists(T1, T2, TopType);
-t_find_opaque_mismatch(?tuple(_, _, _) = T1, ?tuple_set(_) = T2, TopType) ->
+  case is_opaque_type(T1, Opaques) of
+    false -> {ok, TopType, T1};
+    true ->
+      t_find_opaque_mismatch(t_opaque_structure(T1), T2, TopType, Opaques)
+  end;
+t_find_opaque_mismatch(?product(T1), ?product(T2), TopType, Opaques) ->
+  t_find_opaque_mismatch_ordlists(T1, T2, TopType, Opaques);
+t_find_opaque_mismatch(?tuple(T1, Arity, _), ?tuple(T2, Arity, _),
+                       TopType, Opaques) ->
+  t_find_opaque_mismatch_ordlists(T1, T2, TopType, Opaques);
+t_find_opaque_mismatch(?tuple(_, _, _) = T1, ?tuple_set(_) = T2,
+                       TopType, Opaques) ->
   Tuples1 = t_tuple_subtypes(T1),
   Tuples2 = t_tuple_subtypes(T2),
-  t_find_opaque_mismatch_lists(Tuples1, Tuples2, TopType);
-t_find_opaque_mismatch(T1, ?union(U2), TopType) ->
-  t_find_opaque_mismatch_lists([T1], U2, TopType);
-t_find_opaque_mismatch(_T1, _T2, _TopType) -> error.
+  t_find_opaque_mismatch_lists(Tuples1, Tuples2, TopType, Opaques);
+t_find_opaque_mismatch(T1, ?union(U2), TopType, Opaques) ->
+  t_find_opaque_mismatch_lists([T1], U2, TopType, Opaques);
+t_find_opaque_mismatch(_T1, _T2, _TopType, _Opaques) -> error.
 
-t_find_opaque_mismatch_ordlists(L1, L2, TopType) ->
+t_find_opaque_mismatch_ordlists(L1, L2, TopType, Opaques) ->
   List = lists:zipwith(fun(T1, T2) ->
-			   t_find_opaque_mismatch(T1, T2, TopType)
+			   t_find_opaque_mismatch(T1, T2, TopType, Opaques)
 		       end, L1, L2),
   t_find_opaque_mismatch_list(List).
 
-t_find_opaque_mismatch_lists(L1, L2, _TopType) ->
-  List = [t_find_opaque_mismatch(T1, T2, T2) || T1 <- L1, T2 <- L2],
+t_find_opaque_mismatch_lists(L1, L2, _TopType, Opaques) ->
+  List = [t_find_opaque_mismatch(T1, T2, T2, Opaques) || T1 <- L1, T2 <- L2],
   t_find_opaque_mismatch_list(List).
 
 t_find_opaque_mismatch_list([]) -> error;
@@ -1423,7 +1435,6 @@ t_number_vals(Type) ->
 t_number_vals(Type, Opaques) ->
   do_opaque(Type, Opaques, fun number_vals/1).
 
-number_vals(?int_set(?any)) -> unknown;
 number_vals(?int_set(Set)) -> set_to_list(Set);
 number_vals(?number(_, _)) -> unknown;
 number_vals(?opaque(_)) -> unknown;