If a subscript uses a read accessor to yield a noncopyable value,
we'd emit an `end_apply` that's too tightly scoped to allow for
a subsequent borrowing access on the yielded value.
resolves rdar://159079818
Although I don't plan to bring over new assertions wholesale
into the current qualification branch, it's entirely possible
that various minor changes in main will use the new assertions;
having this basic support in the release branch will simplify that.
(This is why I'm adding the includes as a separate pass from
rewriting the individual assertions)
The original design was to make it so that end_borrow tied at the use level its
original/borrowed value. So we would have:
```
%borrowedVal = begin_borrow %original
...
end_borrow %borrowedVal from %original
```
In the end we decided not to use that design and instead just use:
```
%borrowedVal = begin_borrow %original
...
end_borrow %borrowedVal
```
In order to enable that transition, I left the old API for end_borrow that took
both original and borrowedVal and reimplemented it on top of the new API that
just took the borrowedVal (i.e. the original was just a dead arg).
Now given where we are in the development, it makes sense to get rid of that
transition API and move to just use the new API.
For now, the accessors have been underscored as `_read` and `_modify`.
I'll prepare an evolution proposal for this feature which should allow
us to remove the underscores or, y'know, rename them to `purple` and
`lettuce`.
`_read` accessors do not make any effort yet to avoid copying the
value being yielded. I'll work on it in follow-up patches.
Opaque accesses to properties and subscripts defined with `_modify`
accessors will use an inefficient `materializeForSet` pattern that
materializes the value to a temporary instead of accessing it in-place.
That will be fixed by migrating to `modify` over `materializeForSet`,
which is next up after the `read` optimizations.
SIL ownership verification doesn't pass yet for the test cases here
because of a general fault in SILGen where borrows can outlive their
borrowed value due to being cleaned up on the general cleanup stack
when the borrowed value is cleaned up on the formal-access stack.
Michael, Andy, and I discussed various ways to fix this, but it seems
clear to me that it's not in any way specific to coroutine accesses.
rdar://35399664
This method verifies that all non-dead cleanup handles that a formal evaluation
scope would pop have not been popped yet.
The body of the function is if-defed out when asserts are disabled.
rdar://31313534
This fixes a logic error. Specifically: When we create a formal evaluation scope
in an inout conversion scope, we set it as if it was already popped. In the case
when we pop the scope by hand, this causes a "don't pop this scope twice" assert
to fire.
The reason that this is being done is that:
1. SILGenFunction is passed around all throughout SILGen, including in between
APIs some of which call the SILGenFunction variable SGF and others that call it
gen.
2. Thus when one is debugging code in SILGen, one wastes time figuring out what
the variable name of SILGenFunction is in the current frame.
I did not do this by hand. I did this by:
1. Grepping for "SILGenFunction &gen".
2. By hand inspecting that the match was truly a SILGenFunction &gen site.
3. If so, use libclang tooling to rename the variable to SGF.
So I did not update any use sites.
Previously, we were emitting these cleanups at the end of the lexical scope
instead of at the end of the formal evaluation scope. This change ensures that
we always emit the cleanup immediately at the end of the formal evaluation
scope.
Previously in most cases we got away with this due to the +0 self
hack. Basically we would emit a get for a self parameter and then immediately
use that self parameter as a guaranteed parameter. Then the hack would insert
the destroy value forwarding the lexical scope level cleanup at the same time.
rdar://29791263
As per John, WritebackScope was always an unfortunate name. Generally these
scopes are meant for formal evaluations of inout parameters. The cases that I am
interested in generalizing them to be used for are borrows of the base of a
class that will then be used as an lvalue.
This also eliminates the out of line vector of lvalue writebacks.
rdar://29791263
