Fix OCaml compiler regressions - #6
Merged
Merged
Conversation
miselin
marked this pull request as ready for review
July 27, 2026 17:05
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Summary
Why
I attempted a port of DOOM from C to Haven, and discovered several rough edges and pure compiler bugs along the way. Some of these were regressions from the OCaml branch, but some were carried over from the previous C implementation of the compiler.
This also revealed some limits in the test coverage. For example, the previous short-circuit test used division by zero as an unobservable RHS computation, which allowed eager evaluation to escape detection. That test has been updated to explicitly flush out incorrect short-circuit behavior and avoid regressing again.
Validation
dune runtestdune build @all-Os,-O0,-O1,-O2, and-O3git diff --check