There should be escaped identifiers in code completion:
- As primary expression: Any keyword name except for `self` and `Self`.
- After dot: Something named `init`.
rdar://problem/16232627
When completing in the only expression of closure, use the return type
of the closure as the type context for the code-completion. However,
since code-completion may be on an incomplete input, we only use the
return type to improve the quality of the result, not to mark it
invalid, since (a) we may add another statement afterwards, or (b) if
the context type is Void it doesn't need to match the value.
There were 2 functions to output argument list. Consolidate them and
consistently use it from every call like production (i.e. function call,
constructor call, enum with associated values, subscript)
Other instances of fb9c65e. Consistently use
PrintOption.PrintOptionalAsImplicitlyUnwrapped to print IUO.
rdar://problem/41046225
rdar://problem/42443512
Calling '@objc optional func' requires '?' or '!' after its name. When
completing method calls for them, 'key.sourcetext' should have '?'
whereas 'key.name' shouldn't.
Note that we deliberately do not use optional type name for
'key.typename'. This is consistent with optional chain '?.<propertyName>'
behavior.
rdar://problem/37904574
"Accessibility" has a different meaning for app developers, so we've
already deliberately excised it from our diagnostics in favor of terms
like "access control" and "access level". Do the same in the compiler
now that we aren't constantly pulling things into the release branch.
This commit changes the 'Accessibility' enum to be named 'AccessLevel'.
Add an option to the lexer to go back and get a list of "full"
tokens, which include their leading and trailing trivia, which
we can index into from SourceLocs in the current AST.
This starts the Syntax sublibrary, which will support structured
editing APIs. Some skeleton support and basic implementations are
in place for types and generics in the grammar. Yes, it's slightly
redundant with what we have right now. lib/AST conflates syntax
and semantics in the same place(s); this is a first step in changing
that to separate the two concepts for clarity and also to get closer
to incremental parsing and type-checking. The goal is to eventually
extract all of the syntactic information from lib/AST and change that
to be more of a semantic/symbolic model.
Stub out a Semantics manager. This ought to eventually be used as a hub
for encapsulating lazily computed semantic information for syntax nodes.
For the time being, it can serve as a temporary place for mapping from
Syntax nodes to semantically full lib/AST nodes.
This is still in a molten state - don't get too close, wear appropriate
proximity suits, etc.
One minor revision: this lifts the proposed restriction against
overriding a non-open method with an open one. On reflection,
that was inconsistent with the existing rule permitting non-public
methods to be overridden with public ones. The restriction on
subclassing a non-open class with an open class remains, and is
in fact consistent with the existing access rule.
'fileprivate' is considered a broader level of access than 'private',
but for now both of them are still available to the entire file. This
is intended as a migration aid.
One interesting fallout of the "access scope" model described in
758cf64 is that something declared 'private' at file scope is actually
treated as 'fileprivate' for diagnostic purposes. This is something
we can fix later, once the full model is in place. (It's not really
/wrong/ in that they have identical behavior, but diagnostics still
shouldn't refer to a type explicitly declared 'private' as
'fileprivate'.)
As a note, ValueDecl::getEffectiveAccess will always return 'FilePrivate'
rather than 'Private'; for purposes of optimization and code generation,
we should never try to distinguish these two cases.
This should have essentially no effect on code that's /not/ using
'fileprivate' other than altered diagnostics.
Progress on SE-0025 ('fileprivate' and 'private')
This adds a narrow special case in code-completion for control-flow-like
methods such as DispatchQueue().sync that are () -> (), to add a new
completion where the trailing closure is immediately expanded rather
than having to invoke placeholder expansion as a second step.
rdar://problem/26628804
As implied in rdar://24818863, striking through a module name may be an overkill to suggest the module is redundant to import. We try to
fine-grain not-recommended-reason so that proper UI cue can be adopted in the future.
When the LHS is an lvalue/assignable tuple and there is no leading
sequence of binary expressions.
It's a bit hacky right now since we don't have a good way to
differentiate general pattern completions from builtin operators.
rdar://problem/23209683
When auto-completing import decls, we should prioritize not-yet imported modules
over already-imported modules. To do so, we mark the latter with not-recommended tag.
Similar with @keyword, manifesting @recommended and @recommendedover content in code
completion results can help IDE users to choose the right API in the long candidate list.
This commit extract these two attributes from Clang doc comments and insert/cache them in
code completion results.
rdar://23101030 and rdar://23101029
Conventionally, code completion results are matched with user input solely by
names. However, names are limited in expressiveness. From this comments, we start to
decorate code completion results with @keywords fields extracted from Clang doc comments.
These fields are added by API authors to comment the decl with information that
is not manifested clear enough through names. Code completion users' typing of the
keyword leads to the corresponding code completion results being selected as well.
Keywords can be arbitrarily long and can be multiple.
For instance, a function called "index()" has "@keyword find" in its doc comment.
Users' typing of "find" leads to "index()" being selected in the code completion list.
Go beyond the existing keyword completions to include more literal
suggestions: 0, 0.0, "text", [item], [key: value], (item, item)
For rdar://problem/21923069
Swift SVN r32890
Peek at the token following the code completion location to decide
whether or not to provide completions for entire call patterns. When
the next token looks like it's part of an existing call we don't show
the patterns because they will "push out" the existing arguments.
We should now get:
Foo<here> => (blah, blah)
Foo(<here> => ['(']blah, blah)
Foo(<here>) => ['(']blah, blah[')']
Foo(<here>, blah) => just complete the values for arg1**
Foo(<here>blah, blah) => just complete the values for arg1
** A further improvement will be to add the argument label completion
for the first argument (if applicable) when we aren't showing a full
call pattern.
rdar://problem/22804670
Swift SVN r32765
...into separate prefix, postfix and infix operators. Also incidentally
make the whitespace around operators special so we can decide when to
skip over it. Tested in SourceKit.
Swift SVN r32468
