a constraint system in "allowFreeTypeVariables" mode. Previously, we
only allowed a few specific constraints, now we allow any relational and
member constraints. The later one is a big deal because it means that we
can allow ".Foo" expressions as ambiguous solutions, which CSDiags can
handle well.
This unblocks solving 23942743 and enables some minor improvements across
the board, including diagnosing things like this better:
Optional(.none) // now: generic parameter 'T' could not be inferred
That said, it also just permutes some non-awesome diagnostics.
- Produce more specific diagnostics relating to different kinds of invalid
- add a testcase, nfc
- Reimplement FailureDiagnosis::diagnoseGeneralMemberFailure in terms of
Not including r30787 means that we still generate bogus diagnostics like:
[1, 2, 3].doesntExist(0) // expected-error {{type 'Int2048' does not conform to protocol 'IntegerLiteralConvertible'}}
But it is an existing and separable problem from the issues addressed here.
Swift SVN r30819
r30787 causes our tests to time out; the other commits depend on r30787.
Revert "revert part of my previous patch."
Revert "Produce more specific diagnostics relating to different kinds of invalid"
Revert "add a testcase, nfc"
Revert "- Reimplement FailureDiagnosis::diagnoseGeneralMemberFailure in terms of"
Revert "Fix places in the constraint solver where it would give up once a single "
Swift SVN r30805
performMemberLookup, eliminating a ton of duplicated logic, but keeping the
same general behavior.
- Now that r30787 landed, we can have diagnoseGeneralMemberFailure inform
clients when a member lookup fails due to referencing a candidate decl of
ErrorType (i.e, it is already invalid somehow). When this happens, there is
no reason to diagnose a problem, because the original issue has been diagnosed
and anything we produce now is just garbage.
The second point cleans up a bunch of bogus diagnostics in the testsuite, which are
*actually* due to upstream error that are already diagnosed.
Swift SVN r30789
"unavoidable failure" path, along with Failure::DoesNotHaveNonMutatingMember and
just doing some basic disambiguation in CSDiags.
This provides some benefits:
- Allows us to plug in much more specific diagnostics for the existing "only has
mutating members" diagnostic, including producing notes for why the base expr
isn't mutable (see e.g. test/Sema/immutability.swift diffs).
- Corrects issues where we'd drop full decl name info for selector references.
- Wordsmiths diagnostics to not complain about "values of type Foo.Type" instead
complaining about "type Foo"
- Where before we would diagnose all failures with "has no member named", we now
distinguish between when there is no member, and when you can't use it. When you
can't use it, you get a vauge "cannot use it" diagnostic, but...
- This provides an infrastructure for diagnosing other kinds of problems (e.g.
trying to use a private member or a static member from an instance).
- Improves a number of cases where failed type member constraints would produce uglier
diagnostics than a different constraint failure would.
- Resolves a number of rdars, e.g. (and probably others):
<rdar://problem/20294245> QoI: Error message mentions value rather than key for subscript
Swift SVN r30715
This is more complex than it could be if ExtensionDecl and NominalTypeDecl
had a common ancestor in the Decl hierarchy, however this is not possible
right now because TypeDecl inherits from ValueDecl.
Fixes <rdar://problem/20981254>.
Swift SVN r28941
they may have been marked invalid because they're duplicates.
<rdar://problem/20922401> Compiler crash "ambiguity in enum case name
lookup?!"
Swift SVN r28487
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
- Situations where the type of a return statement's result expression doesn't line up with the function's type annotation.
- Situations where the type of an initializer expression doesn't line up with its declaration's type pattern.
- Situations where we assume a conversion to a built-in protocol must take place, such as in if-statement conditionals.
(Addresses rdar://problem/19224776, rdar://problem/19422107, rdar://problem/19422156, rdar://problem/19547806 and lots of other dupes.)
Swift SVN r24853
Most tests were using %swift or similar substitutions, which did not
include the target triple and SDK. The driver was defaulting to the
host OS. Thus, we could not run the tests when the standard library was
not built for OS X.
Swift SVN r24504
If either parameter to == has a known concrete type at constraint generation
time, see if that type is a nominal that can derive its conformance to
Equatable. If so, do so, and then add that == to the overload set.
(It may already be there, but that's okay -- it will get uniqued later.)
This isn't perfect because it relies on one of the parameters to == having
a concrete type /before/ constraint solving. There are plenty of reasons
why that wouldn't happen. But this at least fixes the common case, and
breaking the expression up into multiple lines is a less distasteful
workaround than replacing (x == .Value) with !(x != .Value). I've added a
test case that should work but doesn't that we can revisit later.
rdar://problem/18073705
Swift SVN r21557
