The `$generator` variable we create for the async for..in loop is
`nonisolated(unsafe)`, so ensure that we generate an `unsafe`
expression when we use it. This uncovered some inconsistencies in how
we do `unsafe` checking for for..in loops, so fix those.
Fixes rdar://154775389.
With the acceptance of SE-0458, allow the use of unsafe expressions, the
@safe and @unsafe attributes, and the `unsafe` effect on the for..in loop
in all Swift code.
Introduce the `-strict-memory-safety` flag detailed in the proposal to
enable strict memory safety checking. This enables a new class of
feature, an optional feature (that is *not* upcoming or experimental),
and which can be detected via `hasFeature(StrictMemorySafety)`.
Introduce an `unsafe` expression akin to `try` and `await` that notes
that there are unsafe constructs in the expression to the right-hand
side. Extend the effects checker to also check for unsafety along with
throwing and async operations. This will result in diagnostics like
the following:
10 | func sum() -> Int {
11 | withUnsafeBufferPointer { buffer in
12 | let value = buffer[0]
| | `- note: reference to unsafe subscript 'subscript(_:)'
| |- warning: expression uses unsafe constructs but is not marked with 'unsafe'
| `- note: reference to parameter 'buffer' involves unsafe type 'UnsafeBufferPointer<Int>'
13 | tryWithP(X())
14 | return fastAdd(buffer.baseAddress, buffer.count)
These will come with a Fix-It that inserts `unsafe` into the proper
place. There's also a warning that appears when `unsafe` doesn't cover
any unsafe code, making it easier to clean up extraneous `unsafe`.
This approach requires that `@unsafe` be present on any declaration
that involves unsafe constructs within its signature. Outside of the
signature, the `unsafe` expression is used to identify unsafe code.
The `@unchecked` conformance is effectively the same as
`@safe(unchecked)`, in that it asserts memory safety in a place where
it cannot be automatically checked. But once that has been asserted,
there is no reason to diagnose anywhere else.
While here, drop the "unsafe declaration here" note, which isn't
adding value but did add noise.
Thanks, Alex!
@preconcurrency imports disable Sendable checking, which can lead to
data races that undermine memory safety. Diagnose such imports, and
require `@safe(unchecked)` to suppress the diagnostic.
Under strict concurrency and memory safety, uses of `@unchecked
Sendable` conformances are considered unsafe. Diagnose the use sites,
not the declaration site.
A nonisolated(unsafe) declaration clearly indicates that the
declaration itself is unsafe, so it doesn't need to be diagnosted.
Instead, diagnose any reference to such a declaration that occurs
when strict concurrency is enabled. Make this a collatable unsafe use.
When a declaration is `@unsafe`, don't emit strict safety diagnostics
for uses of unsafe entities, constructs, or types within it. This
allows one to account for all unsafe behavior in a module using strict
memory safety by marking the appropriate declarations `@unsafe`.
Enhance the strict-safety diagnostics to suggest the addition of
`@unsafe` where it is needed to suppress them, with a Fix-It. Ensure
that all such diagnostics can be suppressed via `@unsafe` so it's
possible to get to the above state.
Also includes a drive-by bug fix where we weren't diagnosing unsafe
methods overriding safe ones in some cases.
Fixes rdar://139467327.
Find all the usages of `--enable-experimental-feature` or
`--enable-upcoming-feature` in the tests and replace some of the
`REQUIRES: asserts` to use `REQUIRES: swift-feature-Foo` instead, which
should correctly apply to depending on the asserts/noasserts mode of the
toolchain for each feature.
Remove some comments that talked about enabling asserts since they don't
apply anymore (but I might had miss some).
All this was done with an automated script, so some formatting weirdness
might happen, but I hope I fixed most of those.
There might be some tests that were `REQUIRES: asserts` that might run
in `noasserts` toolchains now. This will normally be because their
feature went from experimental to upcoming/base and the tests were not
updated.
Allow any declaration to be marked with `@unsafe`, meaning that it
involves unsafe code. This also extends to C declarations marked with
the `swift_attr("unsafe")` attribute.
Under a separate experimental flag (`DisallowUnsafe`), diagnose any
attempt to use an `@unsafe` declaration or any unsafe language feature
(such as `unowned(unsafe)`, `@unchecked Sendable`). This begins to
define a "safe" mode in Swift that prohibits memory-unsafe constructs.
