These are tests that fail in the next commit without this flag. This
does not add -verify-ignore-unrelated to all tests with -verify, only
the ones that would fail without it. This is NFC since this flag is
currently a no-op.
Like on 64-bit Android and arm64 Linux, arm64 FreeBSD uses 128 bit
long doubles, which is not supported by Swift resulting in powl to fail
to import and failing the test.
https://github.com/swiftlang/swift/issues/51573
- Don't attempt to insert fixes if there are restrictions present, they'd inform the failures.
Inserting fixes too early doesn't help the solver because restriction matching logic would
record the same fixes.
- Adjust impact of the fixes.
Optional conversions shouldn't impact the score in any way because
they are not the source of the issue.
- Look through one level of optional when failure is related to optional injection.
The diagnostic is going to be about underlying type, so there is no reason to print
optional on right-hand side.
* [NFC] Add a getOptionalityDepth method to return the number of optionals a type has
* [NFC] Use getOptionalityDepth to remove existing code
* [AST] Add a new diagnostic note for suggesting optional chaining
* [CSDiagnostics] Tweak MissingOptionalUnwrapFailure to suggest using optional chaining on closure
* [Test] Add a couple of test cases for perform_optional_chain_on_closure
* [CSDiagnostics] Change DeclRefExpr casts to isa checks
* [AST] Update diagnostic phrasing
* [Sema] Use new diagnostic identifier and update comment
* [Test] Add a new test case for function type
* [Test] Update cfuncs_parse.swift tests to check for new diagnostic note
LLVM doesn't have a stable ABI for Float16 on x86 yet; we're working with Intel to get that fixed, but we don't want to make the type available on macOS until a stable ABI is actually available, because we'd break binaries compiled before any calling convention changes if we do.
In Android ARMv7 there was no alias defined for CLongDouble, so
importing anything with long double was failing. Defining the alias
makes the test pass.
AAPCS64 defines long double as 128 bits, which is still unsupported by
Swift (SR-9072). Disable this particular test for Android and Linux in
AArch64 to not fail (but still test all the other tests).
When we determine that an optional value needs to be unwrapped to make
an expression type check, use notes to provide several different
Fix-It options (with descriptions) rather than always pushing users
toward '!'. Specifically, the errors + Fix-Its now looks like this:
error: value of optional type 'X?' must be unwrapped to a value of
type 'X'
f(x)
^
note: coalesce using '??' to provide a default when the optional
value contains 'nil'
f(x)
^
?? <#default value#>
note: force-unwrap using '!' to abort execution if the optional
value contains 'nil'
f(x)
^
!
Fixes rdar://problem/42081852.
And provide better semantic background by surrounding 'nil' in ticks when it is referred to as a value
Added missing tests for certain cases involving nil capitalization
* First pass at implementing support for mapping between long double and Float80.
* Only define CLongDouble on platforms where I know what it is.
* remove some hacks that are no longer necessary.
Stop creating ImplicitlyUnwrappedOptional<T> so that we can remove it
from the type system.
Enable the code that generates disjunctions for Optional<T> and
rewrites expressions based on the original declared type being 'T!'.
Most of the changes supporting this were previously merged to master,
but some things were difficult to merge to master without actually
removing IUOs from the type system:
- Dynamic member lookup and dynamic subscripting
- Changes to ensure the bridging peephole still works
Past commits have attempted to retain as much fidelity with how we
were printing things as possible. There are some cases where we still
are not printing things the same way:
- In diagnostics we will print '?' rather than '!'
- Some SourceKit and Code Completion output where we print a Type
rather than Decl.
Things like module printing via swift-ide-test attempt to print '!'
any place that we now have Optional types that were declared as IUOs.
There are some diagnostics regressions related to the fact that we can
no longer "look through" IUOs. For the same reason some output and
functionality changes in Code Completion. I have an idea of how we can
restore these, and have opened a bug to investigate doing so.
There are some small source compatibility breaks that result from
this change:
- Results of dynamic lookup that are themselves declared IUO can in
rare circumstances be inferred differently. This shows up in
test/ClangImporter/objc_parse.swift, where we have
var optStr = obj.nsstringProperty
Rather than inferring optStr to be 'String!?', we now infer this to
be 'String??', which is in line with the expectations of SE-0054.
The fact that we were only inferring the outermost IUO to be an
Optional in Swift 4 was a result of the incomplete implementation of
SE-0054 as opposed to a particular design. This should rarely cause
problems since in the common-case of actually using the property rather
than just assigning it to a value with inferred type, we will behave
the same way.
- Overloading functions with inout parameters strictly by a difference
in optionality (i.e. Optional<T> vs. ImplicitlyUnwrappedOptional<T>)
will result in an error rather than the diagnostic that was added
in Swift 4.1.
- Any place where '!' was being used where it wasn't supposed to be
allowed by SE-0054 will now treat the '!' as if it were '?'.
Swift 4.1 generates warnings for these saying that putting '!'
in that location is deprecated. These locations include for example
typealiases or any place where '!' is nested in another type like
`Int!?` or `[Int!]`.
This commit effectively means ImplicitlyUnwrappedOptional<T> is no
longer part of the type system, although I haven't actually removed
all of the code dealing with it yet.
ImplicitlyUnwrappedOptional<T> is is dead, long live implicitly
unwrapped Optional<T>!
Resolves rdar://problem/33272674.
Previously we had more ad hoc logic that tried to decide if it was
worth desugaring a type based on its structure. Now we instead look
for a typealias that might actually benefit from desugaring, and if
we don't find one we won't show the 'aka' note.
