version of the new CTP_ReturnStmt conversion, used to generate return-specific
diagnostics. Now that we have a general solution, we can just use that.
This improves diagnostics in returns for accessors, since they were apparently
not getting the bit set.
Swift SVN r30665
When a line begins with '.', it's almost always due to a method chain, not an attempt to start an expression with a contextual member lookup. This is a more principled grammar rule than the long tail of hacks we've been putting up to try to accommodate "builder pattern" usages. Fixes rdar://problem/20238557.
Swift SVN r29606
If 'x.init' appears as a member reference other than 'self.init' or 'super.init' within an initializer, treat it as a regular static member lookup for 'init' members. This allows a more explicit syntax for dynamic initializations; 'self.someMetatype()' looks too much like it's invoking a method. It also allows for partial applications of initializers using 'someMetatype.init' (though this needs some SILGen fixes, coming up next). While we're in the neighborhood, do some other correctness and QoI fixes:
- Only lookup initializers as members of metatypes, not instances, and add a fixit (instead of crashing) to insert '.dynamicType' if the initializer is found on an instance.
- Make it so that constructing a class-constrained archetype type correctly requires a 'required' or protocol initializer.
- Warn on unused initializer results. This seems to me like just the right thing to do, but is also a small guard against the fact that 'self.init' is now valid in a static method, but produces a newly-constructed value instead of delegating initialization (and evaluating to void).
Swift SVN r29344
Instead of forcing full application of '{super,self}.init' in the parser, and installing the RebindSelf semantic expr node early, make these constraints to Sema-time checks, and parse '<expr>.init' as a regular postfix production. This is a better separation of concerns, and also opens the door to supporting 'metatype.init()' in more general expression contexts (though that part still needs some follow-up sema work).
Swift SVN r29343
Instead, provide the location of the { in a closure expr to the argument formation as
part of the datastructure already used to manage implicit closure arguments in the parser.
Swift SVN r28818
This sets the location of the implicit closure decls (like $0) to being the location
of the { in a ClosureExpr, instead of the location of the first use. The capture tracker
uses source location information of the decl and the DeclRefExpr to determine if the
referenced value was captured too early, which is what is causing this incorrect error.
Swift SVN r28802
Factor out the special case condition for deciding whether a period_prefix should be treated like a MemberRef postfix production instead of a new UnresolvedMemberExpr, and share it with the generic type disambiguation code, so that 'Foo<T>\n.bar()' parses consistently with 'Foo\n.bar()'. Extend the condition to consider a '.foo' reference on a line by itself in postfix position as a postfix continuation as well, allowing properties to be chained in builder fashion too. Addresses rdar://problem/20238557, but we may want to still make a more general change to the grammar here.
Swift SVN r28707
Before:
t.swift:2:9: error: expected initial value after '='
let x = @"foo"
^
t.swift:2:8: error: consecutive statements on a line must be separated by ';'
let x = @"foo"
^
;
t.swift:2:10: error: expected an attribute name
let x = @"foo"
^
t.swift:2:10: error: expected declaration
let x = @"foo"
^
now:
t.swift:2:9: error: string literals in Swift are not preceeded by an '@' sign
let x = @"foo"
^
Swift SVN r28698
instead of being an expression.
To the user, this has a couple of behavior changes, stemming from its non-expression-likeness.
- #available cannot be parenthesized anymore
- #available is in its own clause, not used in a 'where' clause of if/let.
Also, the implementation in the compiler is simpler and fits the model better. This
fixes:
<rdar://problem/20904820> Following a "let" condition with #available is incorrectly rejected
Swift SVN r28521
Change the syntax of availability queries from #available(iOS >= 8.0, OSX >= 10.10, *) to
This change reflects the fact that now that we spell the query '#available()' rather than
'#os()', the specification is about availability of the APIs introduced in a particular OS
release rather than an explicit range of OS versions on which the developer expects the
code to run.
There is a Fix-It to remove '>=' to ease adopting the new syntax.
Swift SVN r28025
a list of their elements, instead of abusing TupleExpr/ParenExpr
to hold them.
This is a more correct representation of what is going on in the
code and produces slightly better diagnostics in obscure cases.
However, the real reason to fix this is that the ParenExpr's that
were being formed were not being installed into the "semantic"
view of the collection expr, not getting type checked correctly,
and led to nonsensical ParenExprs. These non-sensical ParenExprs
blocked turning on AST verification of other ones.
With this fixed, we can finally add AST verification that
IdentityExpr's have sensible types.
Swift SVN r27850
Add syntax "[#Color(...)#]" for object literals, to be used by
Playgrounds for inline color wells etc. The arguments are forwarded to
the relevant constructor (although we will probably change this soon,
since (colorLiteralRed:... blue:... green:... alpha) is kind of
verbose). Add _ColorLiteralConvertible and _ImageLiteralConvertible
protocols, and link them to the new expressions in the type checker.
CSApply replaces the object literal expressions with a call to the
appropriate protocol witness.
Swift SVN r27479
Enable checking for uses of potentially unavailable APIs. There is
a frontend option to disable it: -disable-availability-checking.
This commit updates the SDK overlays with @availability() annotations for the
declarations where the overlay refers to potentially unavailable APIs. It also changes
several tests that refer to potentially unavailable APIs to use either #available()
or @availability annotations.
Swift SVN r27272
The API review list found it confusing that if #os() and #if os() looked so similar, so
change the availability checking query to be spelled #available:
if #available(iOS >= 9.0, *) {
...
}
Swift SVN r26995
On platforms that are not explicitly mentioned in the #os() guard, this new '*'
availability check generates a version comparison against the minimum deployment target.
This construct, based on feedback from API review, is designed to ease porting
to new platforms. Because new platforms typically branch from
existing platforms, the wildcard allows an API availability check to do the "right"
thing (executing the guarded branch accessing newer APIs) on the new platform without
requiring a modification to every availability guard in the program.
So, if the programmer writes:
if #os(OSX >= 10.10, *) {
. . .
}
and then ports the code to iOS, the body will execute.
We still do compile-time availability checking with '*', so the compiler will
emit errors for references to potentially unavailable symbols in the body when compiled
for iOS.
We require a '*' clause on all #os() guards to force developers to
"future proof" their availability checks against the introduction of new a platform.
Swift SVN r26988
- Enhance PBD with a whereExpr/elseStmt field to hold this.
- Start parsing the pattern of let/var decls as a potentially refutable pattern. It becomes
a semantic error to use a refutable pattern without an 'else' (diagnostics not in place yet).
- Change validatePatternBindingDecl to use 'defer' instead of a goto to ensure cleanups on exit.
- Have it resolve the pattern in a PBD, rewriting it from expressions into pattern nodes when valid.
- Teach resolvePattern to handle TypedPatterns now that they can appear (wrapping) refutable patterns.
- Teach resolvePattern to handle refutable patterns in PBD's without initializers by emitting a diagnostic
instead of by barfing, fixing regressions on validation tests my previous patch caused, and fixing
two existing validation test crashers.
Sema, silgen, and more tests coming later.
Swift SVN r26706
When the code completion token appears after throw keyword,
a set of visible decls and instances conforming _ErrorType are
recommended as completion.
Swift SVN r26565
Rename 'assignment' attribute of infix operators to 'mutating'. Add
'has_assignment' attribute, which results in an implicit declaration of
the assignment version of the same operator. Parse "func =foo"
declaration and "foo.=bar" expression. Validate some basic properties of
in-place methods.
Not yet implemented: automatic generation of wrapper for =foo() if foo()
is implemented, or vice versa; likewise for operators.
Swift SVN r26508
for a member element reference. This improves error recovery and fixes cases where we'd
reject invalid code in unspaced situations (like "(.x)") this fixes rdar://20251513.
Swift SVN r26406
Before we produced:
t.swift:4:12: error: expected identifier after '.' expression
let x = .42
^
t.swift:4:7: error: type annotation missing in pattern
let x = .42
^
now we produce:
t.swift:4:11: error: '.42' is not a valid floating point literal; it must be written '0.42'
let x = .42
^~~
0
Swift SVN r26404
If the placeholder is a typed one, parse its type string into a TypeRepr,
resolve it during typechecking and set it as the type for the associated EditorPlaceholderExpr.
Swift SVN r26215
- Strength reduce isAtStartOfBindingName() to just check for
identifier or _ and inline into its two callers.
- Rename Token::isIdentifierOrNone to isIdentifierOrUnderscore.
- Teach InVarOrLetPattern about matching patterns, so that the
parser knows when it is parsing an expression as a matching
pattern but is not yet inside a let/var pattern.
- Use newfound knowledge of matching patterns to refine handling
of unexpected let/var when parsing an expression, but not in a
pattern context, slightly improving QoI in invalid cases.
Swift SVN r26172
This changes 'if let' conditions to take general refutable patterns, instead of
taking a irrefutable pattern and implicitly matching against an optional.
Where before you might have written:
if let x = foo() {
you now need to write:
if let x? = foo() {
The upshot of this is that you can write anything in an 'if let' that you can
write in a 'case let' in a switch statement, which is pretty general.
To aid with migration, this special cases certain really common patterns like
the above (and any other irrefutable cases, like "if let (a,b) = foo()", and
tells you where to insert the ?. It also special cases type annotations like
"if let x : AnyObject = " since they are no longer allowed.
For transitional purposes, I have intentionally downgraded the most common
diagnostic into a warning instead of an error. This means that you'll get:
t.swift:26:10: warning: condition requires a refutable pattern match; did you mean to match an optional?
if let a = f() {
^
?
I think this is important to stage in, because this is a pretty significant
source breaking change and not everyone internally may want to deal with it
at the same time. I filed 20166013 to remember to upgrade this to an error.
In addition to being a nice user feature, this is a nice cleanup of the guts
of the compiler, since it eliminates the "isConditional()" bit from
PatternBindingDecl, along with the special case logic in the compiler to handle
it (which variously added and removed Optional around these things).
Swift SVN r26150
conjunction with .fixItInsert(). As such, introduce a helper named
.fixItInsertAfter() that does what we all want. Adopt this in various
places around the compiler. NFC.
Swift SVN r26147
We parse 'try' as if it were a unary operator allowed on an
arbitrary element of an expr-sequence, but sequence-folding
constrains it to never appear on the RHS of most operators.
We do allow it on the RHS of an assignment or conditional
operator, but not if there's anything to the right which
was not parsed within the RHS.
We do this for assignments so that
var x = try whatever
and
x = try whatever
both work as you might expect.
We do this for conditionals because it feels natural to
allow 'try' in the center operand, and then disallowing it
in the right operand feels very strange.
In both case, this works largely because these operators are
assumed to be very low-precedence; there are no standard
operators which would parse outside the RHS. But if you
create one and use 'try' before it, we'll diagnose it.
Swift SVN r26052
a let/var pattern. Now any identifier in one of these is a variable binding,
not sometimes a value references (depending on contextual syntax).
This isn't expected to have a widespread effect on existing real world code:
- No impact on the stdlib.
- It does fix two validation crash tests, but possibly because the original issue is hidden by a different diagnostic path in the compiler.
- This needed two tests to be tweaked to undistribute "let".
On the positive side, this means that "case let x?:" now works properly, woo.
Swift SVN r26000
Corrected several places where compiler generated AST nodes were not properly
marked as implicit.
For interpolated strings also fixed string segment locations and made sure
the first and last segments are preserved in AST even if they are empty.
Swift SVN r25983
