BE-254: HashQL: Implement MIR interpreter with runtime value representation #8245

indietyp · 2026-01-08T15:33:16Z

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

Add MIR interpreter for executing HashQL code at runtime. This implements a stack-based interpreter that can execute MIR code, handle function calls, and manipulate runtime values.

🔍 What does this change?

Adds a complete MIR interpreter implementation in libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/interpret/
Implements runtime value representation with support for primitives, aggregates, and collections
Adds error handling and diagnostic reporting for runtime errors
Implements a call stack for function execution and tracking
Adds support for binary and unary operations, control flow, and function calls
Enhances the newtype! macro to support custom display formatting
Adds reserve method to InternSet for preallocating capacity
Updates ID display formatting for better readability in error messages

Pre-Merge Checklist 🚀

🚢 Has this modified a publishable library?

This PR:

does not modify any publishable blocks or libraries, or modifications do not need publishing

📜 Does this require a change to the docs?

The changes in this PR:

are internal and do not require a docs change

🕸️ Does this require a change to the Turbo Graph?

The changes in this PR:

do not affect the execution graph

🛡 What tests cover this?

Comprehensive test suite for the interpreter covering basic execution, operations, control flow, function calls, and error handling
Tests for value representation and manipulation

❓ How to test this?

Run the test suite with cargo test -p hashql-mir
Run Miri tests with cargo miri test -p hashql-mir

cursor · 2026-01-08T15:33:24Z

PR Summary

Implements executable MIR with a new interpreter and value system, plus supportive infra changes.

New interpreter under mir/src/interpret/ (runtime, call stack, locals, rvalue eval, control flow, function calls)
Runtime values: primitives, Struct/Tuple/Opaque, collections (List/Dict using imbl), numeric ops with total ordering
Comprehensive error types → diagnostics conversion; extensive unit and miri tests
op! macro: add ~ (BitNot); integer Int adds bit ops, neg/overflow handling, and tests
id::newtype! macro gains #[display = "..."] and #[no_display]; apply custom Display for BasicBlockId (bbN) and Local (%N); simplify printing call sites
Interning: InternSet::reserve; environment prefill reserves kind capacity
Add imbl dependency; minor dependency bumps; package.json test target update

^{Written by Cursor Bugbot for commit 3fcddd3. This will update automatically on new commits. Configure here.}

indietyp · 2026-01-08T15:34:05Z

Warning

This pull request is not mergeable via GitHub because a downstack PR is open. Once all requirements are satisfied, merge this PR as a stack on Graphite.
Learn more

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/interpret/locals.rs

augmentcode · 2026-01-08T15:39:23Z

🤖 Augment PR Summary

Summary: Adds a stack-based MIR interpreter to execute HashQL MIR at runtime, alongside a runtime Value model and rich diagnostics.

Changes:

Introduce interpret/ with Runtime, CallStack, per-frame Locals, and stepping over statements/terminators
Add runtime Value types (primitives, aggregates, collections) with total ordering/equality; collections backed by imbl
Add RuntimeError + InterpretDiagnosticCategory and conversion to diagnostics with callstack labeling
Implement additional ops: unary ~, plus bitwise/unary operator traits for MIR Int
Enhance ID display via newtype! display controls and update MIR pretty-printers/analysis output accordingly
Add InternSet::reserve and pre-reserve environment kinds; update dev scripts and deps

Technical Notes: Includes extensive end-to-end tests (and Miri coverage) for execution, control flow, calls/returns, aggregates, inputs, and error/ICE paths.

_{🤖 Was this summary useful? React with 👍 or 👎}

augmentcode

Review completed. 3 suggestions posted.

Comment augment review to trigger a new review at any time.

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/interpret/locals.rs

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/interpret/runtime.rs

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/interpret/locals.rs

codspeed-hq · 2026-01-08T15:41:17Z

Merging this PR will not alter performance

Summary

✅ 18 untouched benchmarks
🗄️ 12 archived benchmarks run¹

_{Comparing bm/be-257-hashql-implement-interpreter (3fcddd3) with bm/be-271-hashql-implement-postinline-pass (6cc07e5)}

12 benchmarks were run, but are now archived. If they were deleted in another branch, consider rebasing to remove them from the report. Instead if they were added back, click here to restore them. ↩

codecov · 2026-01-08T15:45:34Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 76.64042% with 534 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 60.84%. Comparing base (6cc07e5) to head (3fcddd3).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/interpret/value/mod.rs	44.96%	140 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
...bs/@local/hashql/mir/src/interpret/value/struct.rs	31.18%	63 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/interpret/value/dict.rs	0.00%	52 Missing ⚠️
libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/interpret/value/str.rs	0.00%	44 Missing ⚠️
libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/interpret/value/list.rs	32.75%	38 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...bs/@local/hashql/mir/src/interpret/value/opaque.rs	0.00%	38 Missing ⚠️
libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/interpret/locals.rs	89.84%	29 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
...ibs/@local/hashql/mir/src/interpret/value/tuple.rs	42.30%	30 Missing ⚠️
libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/interpret/value/num.rs	81.33%	26 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/interpret/error.rs	90.74%	19 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
... and 6 more

Additional details and impacted files

@@                              Coverage Diff                               @@
##           bm/be-271-hashql-implement-postinline-pass    #8245      +/-   ##
==============================================================================
- Coverage                                       65.00%   60.84%   -4.17%     
==============================================================================
  Files                                             737     1090     +353     
  Lines                                           63085   110307   +47222     
  Branches                                         3681     4566     +885     
==============================================================================
+ Hits                                            41007    67111   +26104     
- Misses                                          21597    42429   +20832     
- Partials                                          481      767     +286

Flag	Coverage Δ
local.hash-graph-sdk	`10.88% <ø> (ø)`
rust.antsi	`0.00% <ø> (?)`
rust.harpc-tower	`66.80% <ø> (?)`
rust.hash-codec	`72.76% <ø> (?)`
rust.hashql-compiletest	`46.65% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-mir	`87.56% <76.56%> (-2.22%)`	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/body/constant/int.rs

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/interpret/runtime.rs

github-actions · 2026-01-09T12:37:24Z

Benchmark results

@rust/hash-graph-benches – Integrations

policy_resolution_large

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2002	$$26.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 239 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.576 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.20 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.610 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001	$$12.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 104 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.60 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$42.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 303 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.970 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$14.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 97.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.522 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526	$$23.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 133 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.740 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$26.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 164 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-38.481 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.55 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-82.315 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$13.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 95.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-49.879 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.61 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.582 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.93 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.39 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51	$$3.17 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.75 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.00 \mathrm{ms} \pm 28.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.08 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.44 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.58 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107	$$3.91 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.310 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.25 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.23 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.32 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.63 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$3.86 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.52 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.54 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.99 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.47 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.01 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.33 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1	$$2.59 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.79 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$2.77 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.82 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.65 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.33 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.69 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$2.85 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.87 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$2.93 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.16 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.61 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.82 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25	$$2.79 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.14 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.28 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.89 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.85 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.51 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.11 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.64 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.15 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.40 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.80 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.96 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.05 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.26 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$39.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 229 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.50 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$76.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 372 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.704 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$43.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 161 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.87 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$45.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 180 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.647 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$54.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 328 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.50 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$40.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 155 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.039 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$412 \mathrm{ms} \pm 818 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.056 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$94.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 487 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.933 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$83.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 338 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.351 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$309 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.11 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{red}10.1 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$15.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 70.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.94 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$15.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 72.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.56 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$14.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 58.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.070 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$15.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 84.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.23 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$18.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 108 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.68 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$14.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 83.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.099 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$15.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 94.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.900 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$15.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 83.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.17 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$15.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 85.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.066 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$22.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 173 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.838 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/block/v/1`	$$30.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 294 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.42 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1`	$$31.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 266 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.28 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1`	$$28.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 300 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.688 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1`	$$30.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 282 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.78 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2`	$$30.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 270 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.030 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1`	$$31.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 311 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.32 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1`	$$30.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 314 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.90 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1`	$$30.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 315 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.11 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1`	$$30.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 278 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.408 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: `bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba`	$$8.08 \mathrm{ms} \pm 35.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.09 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$47.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 250 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.538 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$93.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 435 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.294 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$51.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 354 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.045 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$60.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 385 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.569 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$67.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 283 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.040 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$73.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 301 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.139 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$51.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 273 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.91 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$76.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 371 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.761 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$55.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 276 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.248 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$63.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 305 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.605 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$65.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 356 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.715 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$65.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 305 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.528 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$134 \mathrm{ms} \pm 567 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.860 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$130 \mathrm{ms} \pm 461 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.771 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$40.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 162 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-62.079 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$560 \mathrm{ms} \pm 924 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-8.157 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

indietyp added 26 commits January 4, 2026 19:04

feat: interpret value (WIP)

5820eb3

feat: value enum

6f3f70f

feat: value impl

33aefd8

feat: value impl split

47a3c7f

feat: API cleanup

94700c1

feat: runtime

c3fdfdf

feat: runtime v0

0a1f9c5

feat: restructure value to have dedicated ref type

9e5fa00

feat: checkpoint

61d4d10

feat: allocator api support for value tree

f113e11

feat: runtime checkpoint

f4ba5ad

feat: eval runtime

efeab99

feat: int comparison to num

aa021ed

chore: docs

80642b5

chore: implement the reverse

45b58ba

feat: implement num comparison

6e3add5

fix: docs

bf4f7b5

fix: docs

a6b7a7c

test: locals unsafe code

630d565

feat: make errors clearer

e658dca

feat: diagnostics

e1b9bec

chore: docs

630d0fb

chore: docs

ffe995a

fix: comments

7c45aa3

feat: tests

02c830d

test: ICE

3650a92

graphite-app bot assigned indietyp Jan 8, 2026

github-actions bot added area/deps Relates to third-party dependencies (area) area/libs Relates to first-party libraries/crates/packages (area) labels Jan 8, 2026

chore: deps

9ee26ad

graphite-app bot reviewed Jan 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/interpret/locals.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

chore: actually dont typo

99445ee

augmentcode bot reviewed Jan 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/interpret/locals.rs Show resolved Hide resolved

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/interpret/runtime.rs Show resolved Hide resolved

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/interpret/locals.rs Show resolved Hide resolved

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hashdotdesign January 8, 2026 15:41 View deployment

chore: use chunks instead of windows

67de513

vercel bot temporarily deployed to Preview – petrinaut January 8, 2026 15:42 Inactive

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hash January 8, 2026 15:50 View deployment

cursor bot reviewed Jan 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/body/constant/int.rs Show resolved Hide resolved

fix: do not overflow on neg

469cf1f

vercel bot temporarily deployed to Preview – petrinaut January 8, 2026 18:17 Inactive

cursor bot reviewed Jan 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/interpret/runtime.rs Show resolved Hide resolved

indietyp added 2 commits January 8, 2026 20:30

feat: use scratch vector to avoid clobbering

22ece21

chore: better docs

67f33fd

vercel bot temporarily deployed to Preview – petrinaut January 8, 2026 19:32 Inactive

chore: docs

c00e581

vercel bot temporarily deployed to Preview – petrinaut January 8, 2026 19:37 Inactive

fix: doctest

aefc24e

vercel bot temporarily deployed to Preview – petrinaut January 8, 2026 19:46 Inactive

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hash January 8, 2026 19:53 View deployment

cursor bot reviewed Jan 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/interpret/runtime.rs Show resolved Hide resolved

graphite-app bot requested review from a team January 8, 2026 20:21

chore: clear scratch before run

3fcddd3

vercel bot temporarily deployed to Preview – petrinaut January 9, 2026 11:29 Inactive

BE-254: HashQL: Implement MIR interpreter with runtime value representation #8245

Are you sure you want to change the base?

BE-254: HashQL: Implement MIR interpreter with runtime value representation #8245

Conversation

indietyp commented Jan 8, 2026

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

🔍 What does this change?

Pre-Merge Checklist 🚀

🚢 Has this modified a publishable library?

📜 Does this require a change to the docs?

🕸️ Does this require a change to the Turbo Graph?

🛡 What tests cover this?

❓ How to test this?

Uh oh!

cursor bot commented Jan 8, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

PR Summary

Uh oh!

indietyp commented Jan 8, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

augmentcode bot commented Jan 8, 2026

Uh oh!

augmentcode bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq bot commented Jan 8, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Merging this PR will not alter performance

Summary

Footnotes

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Jan 8, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 9, 2026

Benchmark results

@rust/hash-graph-benches – Integrations

policy_resolution_large

policy_resolution_medium

policy_resolution_none

policy_resolution_small

read_scaling_complete

read_scaling_linkless

representative_read_entity

representative_read_entity_type

representative_read_multiple_entities

scenarios

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

cursor bot commented Jan 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codspeed-hq bot commented Jan 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Jan 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading