Add Equatable and Hashable conformance to GUID. (#84792)

On Windows, `GUID` is a currency type and (along with its various
typedefs) is used pervasively Windows offers `IsEqualGUID()` and
`UuidHash()` for comparing and hashing them, respectively, but
`IsEqualGUID()` is a macro in C mode and `UuidHash()` only provides a
16-bit hash. We should provide conformance to these protocols in the
WinSDK overlay to provide equivalent functionality in Swift.
This commit is contained in:
Jonathan Grynspan
2025-10-10 08:34:34 -04:00
committed by GitHub
parent 1803d3ec46
commit 5846e8f6a4
2 changed files with 42 additions and 1 deletions

View File

@@ -319,3 +319,31 @@ func _convertWindowsBoolToBool(_ b: WindowsBool) -> Bool {
return b.boolValue
}
// GUID
extension GUID {
@usableFromInline @_transparent
internal var uint128Value: UInt128 {
unsafe withUnsafeBytes(of: self) { buffer in
// GUID is 32-bit-aligned only, so use loadUnaligned().
unsafe buffer.baseAddress!.loadUnaligned(as: UInt128.self)
}
}
}
// These conformances are marked @retroactive because the GUID type nominally
// comes from the _GUIDDef clang module rather than the WinSDK clang module.
extension GUID: @retroactive Equatable {
@_transparent
public static func ==(lhs: Self, rhs: Self) -> Bool {
lhs.uint128Value == rhs.uint128Value
}
}
extension GUID: @retroactive Hashable {
@_transparent
public func hash(into hasher: inout Hasher) {
hasher.combine(uint128Value)
}
}

View File

@@ -1,4 +1,7 @@
// RUN: %target-build-swift %s
// RUN: %target-build-swift %s -o %t.exe
// RUN: %target-codesign %t.exe
// RUN: %target-run %t.exe
// REQUIRES: executable_test
// REQUIRES: OS=windows-msvc
// Make sure that importing WinSDK brings in the GUID type, which is declared in
@@ -7,3 +10,13 @@
import WinSDK
public func usesGUID(_ x: GUID) {}
// Make sure equating and hashing GUIDs works.
let guid: GUID = GUID_NULL
assert(guid == guid)
assert(guid.hashValue == guid.hashValue)
let guid2: GUID = IID_IUnknown
assert(guid != guid2)
assert(guid.hashValue != guid2.hashValue) // well, probably