When using completion options that will allow the lone "." completion,
provide that result when in contexts that expect an enum type. Note:
this is a crappy approximationg for whether the type can have "implicit
member expression" syntax, since uninhabited enums should not support
it, and many non-enum types should. However, it is currently expensive
to compute the accurate answer and this approximation is good enough for
some clients.
rdar://problem/31260505
The filter name isn't helpful if you want to make rules about specific
overloads - e.g. only show the [Int] subscript on Array.
rdar://problem/28920034
`FreeTypeVariableBinding::GenericParameters` mode allowed to bind
all free type variables with fresh generic parameter types, which
is incorrect (at least) if there are multiple generic solutions
present, because such parameters couldn't be compared.
This mode was used for code completion, which is now switched to use
`FreeTypeVariableBinding::UnresolvedType` instead.
We don't care what the USRs are here, we were just using them to avoid
results slipping in between the start of the structure and the module
name. This patch does that in a way that doesn't use the USR.
There was a ton of complicated logic here to work around
two problems:
- Same-type constraints were not represented properly in
RequirementReprs, requiring us to store them in strong form
and parse them out when printing type interfaces.
- The TypeBase::getAllGenericArgs() method did not do the
right thing for members of protocols and protocol extensions,
and so instead of simple calls to Type::subst(), we had
an elaborate 'ArchetypeTransformer' abstraction repeated
in two places.
Rewrite this code to use GenericSignatures and
GenericFunctionType instead of old-school GenericParamLists
and PolymorphicFunctionType.
This changes the code completion and AST printer output
slightly. A few of the changes are actually fixes for cases
where the old code didn't handle substitutions properly.
A few others are subjective, for example a generic parameter
list of the form <T : Proto> now prints as <T where T : Proto>.
We can add heuristics to make the output whatever we want
here; the important thing is that now we're using modern
abstractions.
* If "required" or "convenience" is specified, emit only initializers
* If "final" or "open" is specified, don't emit initializers or typealias
* If "typealias" is specified, emit only associated type implementation
* Emit "override" or "required" modifier for initializers
* Emit access modifier for initializers
* Emit designated initializers even if "override" is specified
* Don't emit inheritance clause for associated type implentation
- If a parameter type is a sugared function type, mark the type
as non-escaping by default. Previously, we were only doing this
if the parameter type was written as a function type, with no
additional sugar.
This means in the following cases, the function parameter type
is now non-escaping:
func foo(f: ((Int) -> Void))
typealias Fn = (Int) -> Void
func foo(f: Fn)
- Also, allow @escaping to be used in the above cases:
func foo(f: @escaping ((Int) -> Void))
typealias Fn = (Int) -> Void
func foo(f: @escaping Fn)
- Diagnose usages of @escaping in inappropriate locations, instead
of just ignoring them.
It is unfortunate that sometimes we end up desugaring the typealias,
but currently there are other cases where this occurs too, such as
qualified lookpu of protocol typealiases with a concrete base
type, and generic type aliases. A more general representation for
sugared types (such as an AttributedType sugared type) would allow
us to solve this in a more satisfactory manner in the future.
However at the very least this patch factors out the common code
paths and adds comments, so it shouldn't be too bad going forward.
Note that this is a source-breaking change, both because @escaping
might need to be added to parameters with a sugared function type,
and @escaping might be removed if it appears somewhere where we
do not mark function types as non-escaping by default.
What I've implemented here deviates from the current proposal text
in the following ways:
- I had to introduce a FunctionArrowPrecedence to capture the parsing
of -> in expression contexts.
- I found it convenient to continue to model the assignment property
explicitly.
- The comparison and casting operators have historically been
non-associative; I have chosen to preserve that, since I don't
think this proposal intended to change it.
- This uses the precedence group names and higherThan/lowerThan
as agreed in discussion.
The high weight on semantic context turns out to give a lot of
unreasonable completions on common types. For example
[0].ma<here>
was suggesting withUnsafeMutable... over map.
rdar://problem/27393776
Right now 'fileprivate' is parsed as an alias for 'private' (or
perhaps vice versa, since the semantics of 'private' haven't changed
yet). This allows us to migrate code to 'fileprivate' without waiting
for the full implementation.
The index may be at the end of the ArrayRef of chunks if the completion
ends with a simple parameter with no type annotation. Check that the
index is in-bounds before adding text.
rdar://problem/26273906
Surface these results in the codecomplete code path (they're already
there in the codecomplete.open code path) so we can use them from IDEs.
For now, just use ad-hoc filtering to show them when the type matches
(or there is no expected type). Ideally we would make this filtering
configurable like we do in the codecomplete.open code path.
rdar://problem/25836544
Code completion had the ability to use declarations to provide better
code completion results for postfix completions, e.g., calls to
functions/methods, but it wasn't trying to get these declarations from
anywhere. Now, get these declarations from the solution to the
constraint system.
The impetus for this is to use default-argument information from the
declaration rather than the type, but plumbing this information
through also means that we get proper "rethrows" annotations, covered
by <rdar://problem/21010193>, and more specific completions in a
number of other places.
Fixes <rdar://problem/21010193>.
* A bunch of them require objc_interop because they import code containing
Objective-C.
* Many others fail on Ubuntu 14.04 because the C++ there doesn't have a
functional std::regex implementation which is required by the
`complete-test` tool.
It may be possible to adjust some of these tests in the future to not
need these extra requirements, but this is a straightforward way to
clean up Linux test results for now.
... and don't try to filter the extended results. Once the results are
extended with the common prefix they will not match identifier filter
rules, which will create differences between completions depending on
whether they had a filter text or were a postfix expression. Also,
allow filtering by name directly on the inner operator name for inner
operators.
rdar://problem/26312235
Ideally we would have precise completion for all our keywords; for now,
just imporove handling of 'return', which we can do by checking if the
current context is a function/closure/init/subscript/etc.
rdar://problem/26307555
We want inputs for function names to follow SE-0021 with the exception
that a function with no arguments is spelled `foo()` instead of `foo`,
because we have no type to disambiguate with and it's not ambiguous with
a call in this context.
Internally, we use a filter name without underscores because we don't
want to introduce spurious matches to the `_` character which might be
part of identifiers.
For now, continue to accept the old names to ease the transition.
rdar://problem/24350800
The filter name of a function should match the spelling of the function
name according to the language except that we don't insert _ for unnamed
parameters because underscores are legal inside identifiers and we don't
want to introduce spurious matches (also, we keep the () on a
parameterless function for disambiguation).
rdar://problem/26118915
It was pointed out to me that this syntax is legal (d'oh). Maybe we
should delete the extra spaces when we insert the ".", but otherwise
this is working as-is.
This reverts commit 1878be2c1f.
In the new code-completion code path, force any known operators to go
through a fixed sort order. To identify operators unambiguously, add a
new BuiltinOperator code-completion kind to handle non-decl operators
(!, ., ?., and =).
rdar://problem/25994246
rdar://problem/23440367
* Implement the majority of parsing support for SE-0039.
* Parse old object literals names using new syntax and provide FixIt.
For example, parse "#Image(imageLiteral:...)" and provide a FixIt to
change it to "#imageLiteral(resourceName:...)". Now we see something like:
test.swift:4:9: error: '#Image' has been renamed to '#imageLiteral
var y = #Image(imageLiteral: "image.jpg")
^~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~
#imageLiteral resourceName
Handling the old syntax, and providing a FixIt for that, will be handled in a separate
commit.
Needs tests. Will be provided in later commit once full parsing support is done.
* Add back pieces of syntax map for object literals.
* Add parsing support for old object literal syntax.
... and provide fixits to new syntax.
Full tests to come in later commit.
* Improve parsing of invalid object literals with old syntax.
* Do not include bracket in code completion results.
* Remove defunct code in SyntaxModel.
* Add tests for migration fixits.
* Add literals to code completion overload tests.
@akyrtzi told me this should be fine.
* Clean up response tests not to include full paths.
* Further adjust offsets.
* Mark initializer for _ColorLiteralConvertible in UIKit as @nonobjc.
* Put attribute in the correct place.
These results are cached, so we can't use the type-relation. Instead we
use a small hack of checking the textual return type for "Void". This
is obviously not ideal, but it lets us detect the most important cases.
rdar://problem/22810741
experimental code-completion path. Move them right before "other module"
results. This is a bit of a hack. Ideally, we would have a much better
idea which keywords are actually legal/likely in a given context and
could prioritize them even more. Since today we basically splat in all
the keywords, keep them below the current module results so they don't
overwhelm us.
rdar://problem/25119529
