Potential unavailability of a declaration has always been diagnosed in contexts
that do not have a sufficient platform introduction constraint, even when those
contexts are also unavailable on the target platform. This behavior is overly
strict, since the potential unavailability will never matter, but it's a
longstanding quirk of availability checking. As a result, some source code has
been written to work around this quirk by marking declarations as
simultaneously unavailable and introduced for a given platform:
```
@available(macOS, unavailable, introduced: 15)
func unavailableAndIntroducedInMacOS15() {
// ... allowed to call functions introduced in macOS 15.
}
```
When availability checking was refactored to be based on a constraint engine in
https://github.com/swiftlang/swift/pull/79260, the compiler started effectively
treating `@available(macOS, unavailable, introduced: 15)` as just
`@available(macOS, unavailable)` because the introduction constraint was
treated as lower priority and therefore superseded by the unavailability
constraint. This caused a regression for the code that was written to work
around the availability checker's strictness.
We could try to match the behavior from previous releases, but it's actually
tricky to match the behavior well enough in the new availability checking
architecture to fully fix source compatibility. Consequently, it seems like the
best fix is actually to address this long standing issue and stop diagnosing
potential unavailability in unavailable contexts. The main risk of this
approach is source compatibility for regions of unavailable code. It's
theoretically possible that restricting available declarations by introduction
version in unavailable contexts is important to prevent ambiguities during
overload resolution in some codebases. If we find that is a problem that is too
prevalent, we may have to take a different approach.
Resolves rdar://147945883.
If a conformance is unavailable then checking for the potential unavailability
of a witness doesn't make sense so skip it. This is necessary now because
availability scopes no longer constrain the platform introduction version for a
source range in that is annotated in source to be simultaneously unavailable
and also introduced in a later version.
This fixes a regression caused by https://github.com/swiftlang/swift/pull/79249.
Resolves rdar://145255592.
Since availability scopes may be built at arbitrary times, the builder may
encounter ASTs where SequenceExprs still exist and have not been folded, or it
may encounter folded SequenceExprs that have not been removed from the AST.
To avoid a double visit, track whether a SequenceExpr is folded and then
customize how ASTVisitor handles folded sequences.
Resolves rdar://142824799 and https://github.com/swiftlang/swift/issues/78567.
