Otherwise, we hit a problem because the setter is called with self passed as a
(single retainable pointer) value, but the witness expects a self value passed
indirectly.
I hit this while testing other stuff related to resilient default implementations.
Parse 'var [behavior] x: T', and when we see it, try to instantiate the property's
implementation in terms of the given behavior. To start out, behaviors are modeled
as protocols. If the protocol follows this pattern:
```
protocol behavior {
associatedtype Value
}
extension behavior {
var value: Value { ... }
}
```
then the property is instantiated by forming a conformance to `behavior` where
`Self` is bound to the enclosing type and `Value` is bound to the property's
declared type, and invoking the accessors of the `value` implementation:
```
struct Foo {
var [behavior] foo: Int
}
/* behaves like */
extension Foo: private behavior {
@implements(behavior.Value)
private typealias `[behavior].Value` = Int
var foo: Int {
get { return value }
set { value = newValue }
}
}
```
If the protocol requires a `storage` member, and provides an `initStorage` method
to provide an initial value to the storage:
```
protocol storageBehavior {
associatedtype Value
var storage: Something<Value> { ... }
}
extension storageBehavior {
var value: Value { ... }
static func initStorage() -> Something<Value> { ... }
}
```
then a stored property of the appropriate type is instantiated to witness the
requirement, using `initStorage` to initialize:
```
struct Foo {
var [storageBehavior] foo: Int
}
/* behaves like */
extension Foo: private storageBehavior {
@implements(storageBehavior.Value)
private typealias `[storageBehavior].Value` = Int
@implements(storageBehavior.storage)
private var `[storageBehavior].storage`: Something<Int> = initStorage()
var foo: Int {
get { return value }
set { value = newValue }
}
}
```
In either case, the `value` and `storage` properties should support any combination
of get-only/settable and mutating/nonmutating modifiers. The instantiated property
follows the settability and mutating-ness of the `value` implementation. The
protocol can also impose requirements on the `Self` and `Value` types.
Bells and whistles such as initializer expressions, accessors,
out-of-line initialization, etc. are not implemented. Additionally, behaviors
that instantiate storage are currently only supported on instance properties.
This also hasn't been tested past sema yet; SIL and IRGen will likely expose
additional issues.
Revert "Make function parameters and refutable patterns always
immutable"
This reverts commit 8f2fbdc93a.
Once we have finally merged master into the Swift 2.2 branch to be, we
should revert this commit to turn the errors back on for Swift 3.0.
All refutable patterns and function parameters marked with 'var'
is now an error.
- Using explicit 'let' keyword on function parameters causes a warning.
- Don't suggest making function parameters mutable
- Remove uses in the standard library
- Update tests
rdar://problem/23378003
- 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
member references:
- Use of instance members from types
- Use of type members from instances
- Use of mutating getters.
This surely resolves some radars, but I'll have to dig them out later.
Swift SVN r30796
"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
return statements, or a return statement with no operand.
Also, fix a special-case diagnostic about converting a return
expression to (1) only apply to converting the actual return
expression, not an arbitrary sub-expression, and (2) use the
actual operand and return types, not the drilled-down types
that caused the failure.
Swift SVN r30420
done, the rest of the infrastructure is all common and can be simplified. This
leaves us with a quite small and maintainable subsystem for diagnosing these
kinds of problems.
include/swift/AST/DiagnosticsSema.def | 28 ++-----
lib/Sema/CSDiag.cpp | 132 ++++++++++------------------------
2 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 112 deletions(-)
Swift SVN r28957
this is neutral w.r.t. diagnostics quality, but deletes a ton
of code:
include/swift/AST/DiagnosticsSema.def | 21 ++---------
lib/Sema/CSDiag.cpp | 64 ++--------------------------------
2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 76 deletions(-)
Swift SVN r28956
that make vardecls and subscripts immutable. This makes the indirect cases
a lot more specific ("this is a get-only property" instead of "this is
immutable") and allows us to consolidate a bunch of code:
2 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 119 deletions(-)
Swift SVN r28954
which tell you what the problem is, not just that you have one.
- Enhance diagnostics to be more specific about function calls producing
rvalues.
Swift SVN r28939
As far as I know, the compiler now only produces the useless "cannot
assign to the result of this expression" diagnostic in cases that don't
make sense to be an lvalue, like "4 = x".
Swift SVN r28935
a 'var' modifier on the parameter, e.g.:
x.swift:44:5: error: cannot assign to 'let' value 'a'
a = 1
~ ^
x.swift:43:8: note: change 'let' parameter to 'var' to make it mutable
func f(let a : Int) {
^~~
var
x.swift:48:5: error: cannot assign to 'let' value 'b'
b = 2
~ ^
x.swift:47:8: note: mark parameter with 'var' to make it mutable
func g(b : Int) {
^
var
Also fix a bug where we'd incorrectly suggesting adding 'mutating' to a class
method when assigning to self in some cases.
Swift SVN r28926
into account accesibility, assignments to self in a non-mutating
method (consistently), recursive components of an lvalue that makes it
non-settable, etc. Now we tell you what the *problem* was, instead of
just whining.
This fixes:
<rdar://problem/19370429> QoI: fixit to add "mutating" when assigning to a member of self in a struct
<rdar://problem/17632908> QoI: Modifying struct member in non-mutating function produces difficult to understand error message
in their full generality.
Swift SVN r28867
if it has already resolved a member binding of an UnresolvedDotExpr. This allows
us to give tailored diagnostics to indicate whether the destination is not an lvalue
because the property itself was immutable or when the base is immutable.
In addition to improved diagnostics, this allows us to fixit hint "let" to "var" on
property definitions, and we can even go so far as to fixit hint insert 'mutating' on
the enclosing func decl when self is the problem.
This fixes the non-subscript cases of:
<rdar://problem/17632908> QoI: Modifying struct member in non-mutating function produces difficult to understand error message
<rdar://problem/19370429> QoI: fixit to add "mutating" when assigning to a member of self in a struct
<rdar://problem/20234955> QoI: Error message for assigning to 'let' fields should say that the error is due to a 'let' binding
Subscript cases to follow.
Swift SVN r28854
When in an initializer, we allow setting into immutable properties
provided that the type of base in `base.member` matches that of that
initializer's containing type. This was an approximation for allowing
full access into `self` during initialization but this doesn't work when
passing in a different struct of the same type because that struct
should be still be immutable.
Check whether the base of the member access is the implicit self
parameter of the initializer before allowing mutation.
rdar://problem/19814302
Swift SVN r28634
We now produce tailored diagnostics for assignment operators that are passed a non-mutable LHS,
e.g.:
t.swift:14:3: error: cannot pass 'let' value 'x' to mutating binary operator '/='
x /= 19
~ ^
t.swift:13:1: note: change 'let' to 'var' to make it mutable
let x = 42
^~~
var
Swift SVN r27780
- <rdar://problem/16306600> QoI: passing a 'let' value as an inout results in an unfriendly diagnostic
- <rdar://problem/16927246> provide a fixit to change "let" to "var" if needing to mutate a variable
We now refer to an inout argument as such, e.g.:
t.swift:7:9: error: cannot pass 'let' value 'a' as inout argument
swap(&a, &b)
^
we also produce a note with a fixit to rewrite let->var in trivial cases where mutation is
being assed for, e.g.:
t.swift:3:3: note: change 'let' to 'var' to make it mutable
let a = 42
^~~
var
The note is produced by both Sema and DI.
Swift SVN r27774
We now produce diagnostics like:
- cannot pass 'let' value 'a' to mutating unary operator '++'
- cannot pass get-only property 'b' to mutating unary operator '++'
- cannot pass immutable value of type 'Int64' to mutating unary operator '++'
Swift SVN r27772
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
