The presence of a generic signature in a XREF means that we should only find the result in a (further-constrained) extension with that generic signature. The absence of a generic signature in a XREF means that we should not find the result in a constrained extension. We implemented the former but not the latter, which would lead to deserialization failures if one had both constrained and unconstrained extensions with the same property in them. Methods/initializers weren’t a problem because the generic signature is (redundantly) encoded in their interface type.
Similarly to how we've always handled parameter types, we
now recursively expand tuples in result types and separately
determine a result convention for each result.
The most important code-generation change here is that
indirect results are now returned separately from each
other and from any direct results. It is generally far
better, when receiving an indirect result, to receive it
as an independent result; the caller is much more likely
to be able to directly receive the result in the address
they want to initialize, rather than having to receive it
in temporary memory and then copy parts of it into the
target.
The most important conceptual change here that clients and
producers of SIL must be aware of is the new distinction
between a SILFunctionType's *parameters* and its *argument
list*. The former is just the formal parameters, derived
purely from the parameter types of the original function;
indirect results are no longer in this list. The latter
includes the indirect result arguments; as always, all
the indirect results strictly precede the parameters.
Apply instructions and entry block arguments follow the
argument list, not the parameter list.
A relatively minor change is that there can now be multiple
direct results, each with its own result convention.
This is a minor change because I've chosen to leave
return instructions as taking a single operand and
apply instructions as producing a single result; when
the type describes multiple results, they are implicitly
bound up in a tuple. It might make sense to split these
up and allow e.g. return instructions to take a list
of operands; however, it's not clear what to do on the
caller side, and this would be a major change that can
be separated out from this already over-large patch.
Unsurprisingly, the most invasive changes here are in
SILGen; this requires substantial reworking of both call
emission and reabstraction. It also proved important
to switch several SILGen operations over to work with
RValue instead of ManagedValue, since otherwise they
would be forced to spuriously "implode" buffers.
And include some supplementary mangling changes:
- Give the first generic param (depth=0, index=0) a single character mangling. Even after removing the self type from method declaration types, 'Self' still shows up very frequently in protocol requirement signatures.
- Fix the mangling of generic parameter counts to elide the count when there's only one parameter at the starting depth of the mangling.
Together these carve another 154KB out of a debug standard library. There's some awkwardness in demangled strings that I'll clean up in subsequent commits; since decl types now only mangle the number of generic params at their own depth, it's context-dependent what depths those represent, which we get wrong now. Currying markers are also wrong, but since free function currying is going away, we can mangle the partial application thunks in different ways.
Swift SVN r32896
Constrained and protocol extensions should always include the extension context in their mangling, since they are never equivalent to definitions in the original type context. Have them use the extension mangling, and include the generic signature of the extension in its mangling, which is necessary to disambiguate properties and other definitions that are defined with the same name and type in differently constrained extensions. Fixes rdar://problem/21027215.
Swift SVN r29209
The only caveat is that:
1. We do not properly recognize when we have a let binding and we
perform a guaranteed dynamic call. In such a case, we add an extra
retain, release pair around the call. In order to get that case I will
need to refactor some code in Callee. I want to make this change, but
not at the expense of getting the rest of this work in.
2. Some of the protocol witness thunks generated have unnecessary
retains or releases in a similar manner.
But this is a good first step.
I am going to send a large follow up email with all of the relevant results, so
I can let the bots chew on this a little bit.
rdar://19933044
Swift SVN r27241
