If result of `CGFloat` -> `Double` conversion is injected into an optional
it should be ranked based on depth just like when locator is fully simplified.
For example:
```swift
func test(v: CGFloat?) {
_ = v ?? 2.0 / 3.0
}
```
In this expression division should be performed on `Double` and result
narrowed down (based on the rule that narrowing conversion should always
be delayed) but `Double` -> `CGFloat?` was given an incorrect score and
instead of picking `?? (_: T?, _: T) -> T` overload, the solver would
use `?? (_: T?, _: T?) -> T?`.
(cherry picked from commit cb876cbd9e)
My change 983b75e1cf broke
-warn-long-expression-type-checking because now the
ExpressionTimer is not instantiated by default and that
entire code path is skipped.
Change it so that if -warn-long-expression-type-checking
is passed in, we still start the timer, we just don't
ever consider it to have 'expired'.
Fixes rdar://problem/152998878.
Follow-up for https://github.com/swiftlang/swift/pull/82326.
The optional injection is only viable is the wrapped type is
not yet resolved, otherwise it's safe to wrap the optional.
We need to be very careful while matching types to test whether a
fix is applicable or not to avoid adding extraneous fixes and failing
the path early. This is a temporary workaround, the real fix would
be to let `matchTypes` to propagate `TMF_ApplyingFixes` down.
Resolves: rdar://154010220
Resolves: https://github.com/swiftlang/swift/issues/82397
If we have a tuple with unresolved pack expansion on one side
and an optional type on the other, prevent `matchTypes` from
wrapping optional into a one-element tuple because the matching
should be handled as part of the optional injection.
Resolves: rdar://152940244
The concrete nesting limit, which defaults to 30, catches
things like A == G<A>. However, with something like
A == (A, A), you end up with an exponential problem size
before you hit the limit.
Add two new limits.
The first is the total size of the concrete type, counting
all leaves, which defaults to 4000. It can be set with the
-requirement-machine-max-concrete-size= frontend flag.
The second avoids an assertion in addTypeDifference() which
can be hit if a certain counter overflows before any other
limit is breached. This also defaults to 4000 and can be set
with the -requirement-machine-max-type-differences= frontend flag.
Currently the note is going to point to the "callee" but that is
incorrect when the failure is related to an argument of a call.
Detect this situation in `RValueTreatedAsLValueFailure::diagnoseAsNote`
and produce a correct note.
Resolves: rdar://150689994
The problem detection logic currently expects `generic argument #<N>`
location to always be associated with two generic types, but that
is not always the case, this locator element is sometimes used for
i.e. optional object types and pointer `Pointee` type when types
appear in argument positions. This needs to be handled specifically.
Resolves: rdar://82971941
Without contextual information it won't be possible to bind a missing
member to a concrete type later, so let's bind them eagerly and propagate
placeholders outward.
Resolves: rdar://152021264
Resolves: https://github.com/swiftlang/swift/issues/81770
This is an attempt to solving
https://github.com/swiftlang/swift/issues/72199.
As I've already lined out in the issue, this seems to be a two-fold
problem.
The first one was a rather easy fix, as I've seen similar approaches in
different parts of the codebase. It is pretty much just un-currying the
generic function.
The second problem was, that `DependentMemberType`s were counted towards
the generic-parameter-should-only-be-mentioned-once-limit even though
you cannot infer the generic type from the dependent member type.
If key or value of a literal collection expression doesn't conform
to protocol(s) expected by the contextual existential type, let's
diagnose that via a tailed collection mismatch fix instead of a
generic conformance one.
Resolves: rdar://103045274
`@autoclosure` is associated with a parameter, we use argument mismatch fix
to diagnose missing explicit calls as well as any mismatches in that position.
Resolves: rdar://110527062
If the argument has an extra `?` or `!`, let's not attempt to force
optional (because it's use is already invalid) and re-introduce
the constraint with unwrapped type instead. This would help to diagnose
the invalid chaining as well as any argument to parameter mismatches.
Resolves: rdar://126080504
This adds an `appendInterpolation` overload to
`DefaultStringInterpolation` that includes a parameter for providing a
default string when the value to interpolate is `nil`. This allows this
kind of usage:
```swift
let age: Int? = nil
print("Your age is \(age, default: "timeless")")
// Prints "Your age is timeless"
```
The change includes an additional fixit when optional values are
interpolated, with a suggestion to use this `default:` parameter.
With `ARCMigrate` and `arcmt-test` removed from clang in
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/119269 and the new code
migration experience under way (see
https://github.com/swiftlang/swift-evolution/pull/2673), these options
are no longer relevant nor known to be in use. They were introduced
long ago to support fix-it application in Xcode.
For now, turn them into a no-op and emit a obsoletion warning.
Check for unsafe constructs in all modes, so that we can emit the
"unsafe does not cover any unsafe constructs" warning consistently.
One does not need to write "unsafe" outside of strict memory safety
mode, but if you do... it needs to cover unsafe behavior.
Potential unavailability of a declaration has always been diagnosed in contexts
that do not have a sufficient platform introduction constraint, even when those
contexts are also unavailable on the target platform. This behavior is overly
strict, since the potential unavailability will never matter, but it's a
longstanding quirk of availability checking. As a result, some source code has
been written to work around this quirk by marking declarations as
simultaneously unavailable and introduced for a given platform:
```
@available(macOS, unavailable, introduced: 15)
func unavailableAndIntroducedInMacOS15() {
// ... allowed to call functions introduced in macOS 15.
}
```
When availability checking was refactored to be based on a constraint engine in
https://github.com/swiftlang/swift/pull/79260, the compiler started effectively
treating `@available(macOS, unavailable, introduced: 15)` as just
`@available(macOS, unavailable)` because the introduction constraint was
treated as lower priority and therefore superseded by the unavailability
constraint. This caused a regression for the code that was written to work
around the availability checker's strictness.
We could try to match the behavior from previous releases, but it's actually
tricky to match the behavior well enough in the new availability checking
architecture to fully fix source compatibility. Consequently, it seems like the
best fix is actually to address this long standing issue and stop diagnosing
potential unavailability in unavailable contexts. The main risk of this
approach is source compatibility for regions of unavailable code. It's
theoretically possible that restricting available declarations by introduction
version in unavailable contexts is important to prevent ambiguities during
overload resolution in some codebases. If we find that is a problem that is too
prevalent, we may have to take a different approach.
Resolves rdar://147945883.
Arguments that were already pack expansions were being wrapped in a
second layer--preventing some would-be unambiguous overloads from
resolving. This adds a check to avoid doing that.
