The reason why this failed is that concurrently to @xedin landing
79af04ccc4, I enabled
NonisolatedNonsendingByDefault on a bunch of other tests. That change broke the
test and so we needed to fix it.
This commit fixes a few issues that were exposed:
1. We do not propagate nonisolated(nonsending) into a closure if its inferred
context isolation is global actor isolated or if the closure captures an
isolated parameter. We previously just always inferred
nonisolated(nonsending). Unfortunately since we do not yet have capture
information in CSApply, this required us to put the isolation change into
TypeCheckConcurrency.cpp and basically have function conversions of the form:
```
(function_conversion_expr type="nonisolated(nonsending) () async -> Void"
(closure_expr type="() async -> ()" isolated_to_caller_isolation))
```
Notice how we have a function conversion to nonisolated(nonsending) from a
closure expr that has an isolation that is isolated_to_caller.
2. With this in hand, we found that this pattern caused us to first thunk a
nonisolated(nonsending) function to an @concurrent function and then thunk that
back to nonisolated(nonsending), causing the final function to always be
concurrent. I put into SILGen a peephole that recognizes this pattern and emits
the correct code.
3. With that in hand, we found that we were emitting nonisolated(nonsending)
parameters for inheritActorContext functions. This was then fixed by @xedin in
With all this in hand, closure literal isolation and all of the other RBI tests
with nonisolated(nonsending) enabled pass.
rdar://154969621
`@_inheritActorContext` is a form of isolation which precludes
direct use of inference of `nonisolated(nonsending)` and `@concurrent`
just like other isolation attributes/modifiers would i.e. `isolated`
or `@isolated(any)`.
`@_inheritActorContext` is a form of isolation which precludes
direct use of inference of `nonisolated(nonsending)` and `@concurrent`
just like other isolation attributes/modifiers would i.e. `isolated`
or `@isolated(any)`.
Forming an isolated conformance to a SendableMetatype-inherting
protocol opens up a soundness hole any time the conformance is used.
Reword the recently-introduced diagnostic for this case and promote it
to an error (except when it's preconcurrency).
Fixes rdar://154808002.
This check had two problems. First, it would assert upon encountering
a layout requirement, due to an unimplemented code path.
A more fundamental issue is that the logic wasn't fully sound, because
it would miss certain cases, for example:
protocol P {
associatedtype A
func run<B: Equatable>(_: B) where B == Self.A
}
Here, the reduced type of `Self.A` is `B`, and at first glance, the
requirement `B: Equatable` appears to be fine. However, this
is actually a new requirement on `Self`, and the protocol be rejected.
Now that we can change the reduction order by assigning weights to
generic parameters, this check can be implemented in a better way,
by building a new generic signature first, where all generic
parameters introduced by the protocol method, like 'B' above, are
assigned a non-zero weight.
With this reduction order, any type that is equivalent to
a member type of `Self` will have a reduced type rooted in `Self`,
at which point the previous syntactic check becomes sound.
Since this may cause us to reject code we accepted previously,
the type checker now performs the check once: first on the original
signature, which may miss certain cases, and then again on the new
signature built with the weighted reduction order.
If the first check fails, we diagnose an error. If the second
check fails, we only diagnose a warning.
However, this warning will become an error soon, and it really
can cause compiler crashes and miscompiles to have a malformed
protocol like this.
Fixes rdar://116938972.
Sema seems to be flagging inout expressions (e.g. &foo) in expression
macros as invalid, setting up a catch 22 where Sema emits an error when
a parameter has the '&' sigil and type checking fails when it doesn't.
This resolves the issue by allowing inout expressions inside macro
expansion expressions.
Resolves https://github.com/swiftlang/swift/issues/82369.
An isolated conformance to a SendableMetatype-inheriting protocol
cannot actually be used in generic code, because the SendableMetatype
requirement itself prevents it. Warn about this case so folks aren't
surprised at runtime.
This is a part of issue #82550 / rdar://154437489.
This is an accepted spelling for the attribute. This commit
also renames the feature flag from `ExtensibleAttribute` to
`NonexhaustiveAttribute` to match the spelling of the attribute.
`TypeSimplifier` may not eliminate type variables from e.g the
pattern types of pattern expansion types since they can remain
unresolved due to e.g having a placeholder count type. Make sure we
eliminate any remaining type variables along with the placeholders.
There's probably a more principled fix here, but this is a quick and
low risk fix we can hopefully take for 6.2.
rdar://154954995
We were effectively working around this previously at the SIL level. This caused
us not to obey the semantics of the actual evolution proposal. As an example of
this, in the following, x should not be considered main actor isolated:
```swift
nonisolated(nonsending) func useValue<T>(_ t: T) async {}
@MainActor func test() async {
let x = NS()
await useValue(x)
print(x)
}
```
we should just consider this to be a merge and since useValue does not have any
MainActor isolated parameters, x should not be main actor isolated and we should
not emit an error here.
I also fixed a separate issue where we were allowing for parameters of
nonisolated(nonsending) functions to be passed to @concurrent functions. We
cannot allow for this to happen since the nonisolated(nonsending) parameters
/could/ be actor isolated. Of course, we have lost that static information at
this point so we cannot allow for it. Given that we have the actual dynamic
actor isolation information, we could dynamically allow for the parameters to be
passed... but that is something that is speculative and is definitely outside of
the scope of this patch.
rdar://154139237
Currently only declarations would get `nonisolated(nonsending)`
inferred if the upcoming flag is enabled, this changes extend
this to apply to asynchronous nonisolated function types as well.
Resolves: rdar://154808850
Serialization and IRGen don't yet support opaque return types that would depend
on querying availability of a custom domain so we need to reject this code to
avoid mis-compiling it.
Inverted availability queries were mis-compiled for zippered libraries because
the code that emits calls to `isOSVersionAtLeastOrVariantVersionAtLeast()` was
not updated when the `if #unavailable` syntax was introduced (at that time
support for zippered libraries had not yet been upstreamed). The result of
these calls is now inverted when appropriate.
To make it easier to manage the growing complexity of supporting availability
queries, Sema now models the relevant information about an availability query
with the new `AvailabilityQuery` type. It encapsulates the domain for the
query, the result if it is known at compile time, and the version tuple
arguments to pass to a runtime invocation if applicable.
Resolves rdar://147929876.
`AvailabilityContext` is now a fundamental type used throughout the compiler,
so it's confusing for `OpaqueUnderlyingTypeChecker` to repurpose this name to
represent an `IfStmt`.
NFC.
We can't assume that type-checking the expression macro in the
parameter will also fail if it fails at the call site since e.g
name lookup may differ. Make sure we only apply this logic to simple
literals.
rdar://154771596
If we fail to resolve the value type for a value generic parameter,
previously we would have returned a null Type, causing crashes
downstream. Instead, return an ErrorType, leaving a null Type for
cases where the generic parameter isn't a value generic at all.
rdar://154856417
This was added in #80220 to fix a related issue with captures of packs,
but it's even better to sink this down into diagnoseNonSendableTypes(),
so that we can handle packs in parameter position as well.
- Fixes https://github.com/swiftlang/swift/issues/82614.
- Fixes rdar://problem/154649522.
It's shouldn't be possible to use these attributes directly on
the function type that is `@isolated(any)` as per SE-0461 proposal
but it shouldn't preclude declarations that have parameters with
`@isolated(any)` from using them.
Resolves: rdar://154754939
