In matchTypes(), we check whether a type variable representing an
argument could potentially be bound to a single param in a TupleType
rather than the whole TupleType, but this check has been pretty
heuristic and ad hoc so far. Replace with an explicit check to see if
it's possible for exactly one of the parameters in the tuple type can be
bound to a single unlabeled argument.
<rdar://problem/22913570>
mode (take 2)
Allow untyped placeholder to take arbitrary type, but default to Void.
Add _undefined<T>() function, which is like fatalError() but has
arbitrary return type. In playground mode, merely warn about outstanding
placeholders instead of erroring out, and transform placeholders into
calls to _undefined(). This way, code with outstanding placeholders will
only crash when it attempts to evaluate such placeholders.
When generating constraints for an iterated sequence of type T, emit
T convertible to $T1
$T1 conforms to SequenceType
instead of
T convertible to SequenceType
This ensures that an untyped placeholder in for-each sequence position
doesn't get inferred to have type SequenceType. (The conversion is still
necessary because the sequence may have IUO type.) The new constraint
system precipitates changes in CSSimplify and CSDiag, and ends up fixing
18741539 along the way.
(NOTE: There is a small regression in diagnosis of issues like the
following:
class C {}
class D: C {}
func f(a: [C]!) { for _: D in a {} }
It complains that [C]! doesn't conform to SequenceType when it should be
complaining that C is not convertible to D.)
<rdar://problem/21167372>
(Originally Swift SVN r31481)
the code to be actually readable since it unnests it greatly), and call it
both before and after argument type validation. This allows us to capture
many more structural errors than before, leading to much better diagnostics
in a lot of cases. This also fixes the specific regressions introduced by
96a1e96.
overloaded argument list mismatches. We printed them in simple cases
due to "Failure" detecting them in trivial situations. Instead of
doing that, let CSDiags do it, which allows us to pick things out of
overload sets and handle the more complex cases well.
This is a progression across the board except for a couple of cases
where we now produce "cannot convert value of type 'whatever' to
expected argument type '(arglist)'", this is a known issue that I'll
fix in a subsequent commit.
Revert "Make function parameters and refutable patterns always
immutable"
This reverts commit 8f2fbdc93a.
Once we have finally merged master into the Swift 2.2 branch to be, we
should revert this commit to turn the errors back on for Swift 3.0.
and probably others.
When we're type-checking a failed ApplyExpr that has an overload set that
prevents getting a specific type to feed into the initial typechecking of
the argument list, ranking can often narrow down the list of candidates
further, to the point where there is only one candidate left or where all
candidates agree that one argument is wrong.
In this case, re-type-check the subexpr with the expected type. In the case of
rdar://problem/22243469 we now produce:
t.swift:6:11: error: invalid conversion from throwing function of type '() throws -> ()' to non-throwing function type '() -> Void'
process {
^
instead of:
t.swift:6:3: error: cannot invoke 'process' with an argument list of type '(() throws -> ())'
process {
^
t.swift:6:3: note: overloads for 'process' exist with these partially matching parameter lists: (UInt, fn: () -> Void)
process {
^
Which is a heck of a lot less specific. Similarly, in the testcase from rdar://23550816, instead
of producing:
takeTwoFuncsWithDefaults { $0 + 1 }
error: cannot invoke 'takeTwoFuncsWithDefaults' with an argument list of type '((Int -> Int)?)'
note: expected an argument list of type '(f1: (Int -> Int)?, f2: (String -> String)?)'
we now produce:
error: cannot convert value of type '_ -> Int' to expected argument type '(String -> String)?'
which is a lot closer to what we want to complain about.
code had the effect of squishing the note that printed the overload candidate
set for the operators in question. While these are not generally helpful given
how many overloads we have of (e.g.) the + operator, it doesn't do us any good
to have special cases like this, because methods can have tons of overloads as
well.
When passing a contextual type to a call, if we have a scalar element
initializing a varargs parameter list, we need to use the varargs element type
contextually. Fixing this improves some confusing diagnostics.
All refutable patterns and function parameters marked with 'var'
is now an error.
- Using explicit 'let' keyword on function parameters causes a warning.
- Don't suggest making function parameters mutable
- Remove uses in the standard library
- Update tests
rdar://problem/23378003
Make the following patterns illegal:
if var x = ... {
...
}
guard var x = ... else {
...
}
while var x = ... {
...
}
And provide a replacement fixit 'var' -> 'let'.
rdar://problem/23172698
Swift SVN r32855
That way, re-typechecking doesn't complain about the lvalue access kind
bit already having been set.
<rdar://problem/23185177> Compiler crashes in Assertion failed: ((AllowOverwrite || !E->hasLValueAccessKind()) && "l-value access kind has already been set"), function visit
Swift SVN r32854
Emit a fix-it replacing them with double-quote string literals.
<rdar://problem/21950709> QoI: Parse single-quoted literals like double-quoted literals
Swift SVN r31973
call expression onto a callee when it was a binary expression. Doing this
requires improving the diagnostics for when the contextual result type is
incompatible with all candidates, but that is general goodness all around.
This fixes:
<rdar://problem/22333090> QoI: Propagate contextual information in a call to operands
and improves a number of diagnostics where the problem is that an operator
is used in a context that expects a type that it cannot produce.
Swift SVN r31891
of providing contextual diagnostics (e.g. producing the warning in
Constraints/dynamic_lookup.swift). This drops a specific diagnostic about
force casting the result of as! which was added in the Swift 1.2 timeframe
to explain the change in cast semantics. Now that as! has been around for
a long time, it is more confusing than helpful.
Swift SVN r31887
- Enhance the branch new argument label overload diagnostic to just
print the argument labels that are the problem, instead of printing
the types inferred at the argument context. This can lead to confusion
particularly when an argument label is missing. For example before:
error: argument labels '(Int)' do not match any available overloads
note: overloads for 'TestOverloadSets.init' exist with these partially matching parameter lists: (a: Z0), (value: Int), (value: Double)
after:
error: argument labels '(_:)' do not match any available overloads
note: overloads for 'TestOverloadSets.init' exist with these partially matching parameter lists: (a: Z0), (value: Int), (value: Double)
Second, fix <rdar://problem/22451001> QoI: incorrect diagnostic when argument to print has the wrong type
by specifically diagnosing the problem when you pass in an argument to a nullary function. Before:
error: cannot convert value of type 'Int' to expected argument type '()'
after:
error: argument passed to call that takes no arguments
print(r22451001(5))
^
Swift SVN r31795
<rdar://problem/22333281> QoI: improve diagnostic when contextual type of closure disagrees with arguments
In the common case where someone doesn't care about the argument
list to a closure, we now generate a tailored error message with a
fixit to introduce the necessary "_,_ in " nonsense at the start
of the closure. IMO ideally we wouldn't require this, but until we
fix that type checker issue, we should at least give people the
obvious fix.
Swift SVN r31720
expr diagnosis stuff, giving us much better diagnostics on the cases in
expr/closure/closures.swift. This is part #2 of resolving
<rdar://problem/22333281> QoI: improve diagnostic when contextual type of closure disagrees with arguments
Swift SVN r31717
specifies some # of arguments but the closureexpr itself disagrees. This is
step #1 to resolving
<rdar://problem/22333281> QoI: improve diagnostic when contextual type of closure disagrees with arguments
Swift SVN r31715
Have ClosureExpr::hasSingleExpressionBody() return true even after the
closure has been coerced to return Void, i.e., { E } has been rewritten
as { E; () }. This fixes some implicit-self diagnostics, and probably
others.
Revision to r31654 for 22441425.
Swift SVN r31665
When assigning discriminators to autoclosure expressions, make sure to
walk into single-expression closures even when they have been converted
to return void, because they aren't type-checked separately.
<rdar://problem/22441425> Swift compiler "INTERNAL ERROR: this diagnostic should not be produced"
Swift SVN r31654
When simplifying tuple element locator, be careful about possibly
accessing non-existent elements of TupleExpr anchor.
<rdar://problem/22426860> CrashTracer: [USER] swift at …mous_namespace::ConstraintGenerator::getTypeForPattern + 698
Swift SVN r31629
where we type check the destination first, then apply its type to the source.
This allows us to get diagnostics for assignments that are as good as PBD
initializers and other cases.
Swift SVN r31404
Now we can propagate contextual types through collection literals even when they are generic, producing
specific diagnostics for elements within them.
Swift SVN r31327
we process contextual constraints when producing diagnostic. Formerly,
we would aggressively drop contextual type information on the floor under
the idea that it would reduce constraints on the system and make it more
likely to be solvable. However, this also has the downside of introducing
ambiguity into the system, and some expr nodes (notably closures) cannot
usually be solved without that contextual information.
In the new model, expr diagnostics are expected to handle the fact that
contextual information may be present, and bail out without diagnosing an
error if that is the case. This gets us more information into closures,
allowing more specific return type information, e.g. in the case in
test/expr/closure/closures.swift.
This approach also produces more correct diagnostics in a bunch of other
cases as well, e.g.:
- var c = [:] // expected-error {{type '[_ : _]' does not conform to protocol 'DictionaryLiteralConvertible'}}
+ var c = [:] // expected-error {{expression type '[_ : _]' is ambiguous without more context}}
and the examples in test/stmt/foreach.swift, test/expr/cast/as_coerce.swift,
test/expr/cast/array_iteration.swift, etc.
That said, this another two steps forward, one back thing. Because we
don't handle propagating sametype constraints from results of calls to their
arguments, we regress a couple of (admittedly weird) cases. This is now
tracked by:
<rdar://problem/22333090> QoI: Propagate contextual information in a call to operands
There is also the one-off narrow case tracked by:
<rdar://problem/22333281> QoI: improve diagnostic when contextual type of closure disagrees with arguments
Swift SVN r31319
