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.
I was originally hoping to reuse mark_must_check for multiple types of checkers.
In practice, this is not what happened... so giving it a name specifically to do
with non copyable types makes more sense and makes the code clearer.
Just a pure rename.
Originally, we were relying on capture info to determine if we needed to insert
this mark_must_check. This ignored that the way that we are handling
escaping/non-escaping is something that is approximated in the AST but actually
determined at SIL level. With that in mind, rather than relying on the capture
info here, just rely on us having an inout argument. The later SIL level
checking for inout escapes is able to handle mark_must_check and knows how to
turn off noncopyable errors in the closure where we detect the error to prevent
us from emitting further errors due to the mark_must_check here.
I discovered this while playing with the previous commit.
rdar://112555589
Vars of such types should be given lexical `alloc_stack`s by
`AllocBoxToStack` which requires that the `alloc_box` insts formed for
them have an associated borrow scope which in turn requires that type
lowering for move only structs and enums have their lexical bits set.
rdar://110901430
this also fixes a bug where sometimes we simply emit
'consumed here' twice and other times we'd said 'other
consume here' for the same "consumed more than once"
message. so I went through and changed all of the 2nd
consumes into "consumed again".
rdar://109281444
- refer to a "consuming use" as simply a "consume", to reserve "use" for non-consuming uses.
- refer to "non-consuming uses" as just a "use".
- don't call it a "user defined deinit" and instead a "deinitializer" to match Sema
- be specific about what binding a closure is capturing that is preventing consumption.
rdar://109281444
- replaces "move-only" terminology with "noncopyable"
- replaces compiler jargon like "guaranteed parameters"
and "lvalue" with corresponding language-level notions
- simplifies diagnostics about closures.
and probably more.
rdar://109281444
Previously, we would emit a "compiler doesn't understand error" since we would
detect the escape and fail. That is the correct behavior here if the
partial_apply is not already identified as escaping by an earlier pass. But in
the case where we see that the partial_apply's callee was marked with
semantics::NO_MOVEONLY_DIAGNOSTICS, then we:
1. Suppress the "compiler doesn't understand error" for this specific
mark_must_check.
2. Suppress function wide the "copy of noncopyable type" error. Since we stopped
processing the mark_must_check that was passed to the partial_apply, we may
have left copies of noncopyable types on that mark_must_check value. This is
ok since the user will get the error, will recompile, and if any further show
up after they fix the inout escaping issue, they will be emitted
appropriately.
I also extended the tests to handle more interesting cases.
NOTE: There are a few cases where we introduced some new do not understand
errors. I am going to fix that in the next commit. I just wanted to completely
update the tests for the manner in which the allocbox to stack change affects
them.
According to SE-377:
consuming cannot be applied to parameters of nonescaping closure type, which by their nature are always borrowed:
// ERROR: cannot `consume` a nonescaping closure
func foo(f: consuming () -> ()) {
}
This commit implements the error message.
rdar://108388132
Specifically, we already have the appropriate semantics for arguments captured
by escaping closures but in certain cases allocbox to stack is able to prove
that the closure doesn’t actually escape. This results in the capture being
converted into a non-escaping SIL form. This then causes the move checker to
emit the wrong kind of error.
The solution is to create an early allocbox to stack that doesn’t promote move
only types in boxes from heap -> stack if it is captured by an escaping closure
but does everything else normally. Then once the move checking is completed, we
run alloc box to stack an additional time to ensure that we keep the guarantee
that heap -> stack is performed in those cases.
rdar://108905586
NOTE: We consider consuming closures that are marked without escaping as
non-escaping. We shouldn't do this, but for now I just included them so that
their behavior is in some test and we at least don't crash.
