Now covers following new areas (alongside simple assignments):
- Contextual type coercions:
- In assignment e.g. `let _: X = foo`
- In return type positions e.g. `func foo() -> A { return bar }`
- Argument-to-parameter applications (including @autoclosure)
If the source of the assignment is a function type which has
a result that could be converted to expected destination type,
let's diagnose that as missing call if such function doesn't
have any parameters.
* Make sure that base and unwrapped types aren't null
* Don't allocate `ForceOptional` fix if nothing has been unwrapped
in `simplifyApplicableFnConstraint`
* Add sugar reconstitution support to `FailureDiagnostic::resolveType`
* Format diagnostics a bit better
Pass constraint system down into offering force unwrap fixits so that we can identify the type of the last member chosen for an optional chain. If there's a chain and the last member's return type isn't optional, then it's cleaner to offer to change that last '?' into a '!' to perform the force, rather than parenthesize the whole expression and force the result.
Introduce a new fix kind into the constraint solver to cover unwrapping the base
of a member access so we can refer to the a member of the unwrapped base.
Wire this fix kind to the just-added diagnostic that suggests either the
chaining ‘?’ or the force-unwrap ‘!’ via separate, descriptive Fix-Its.
Example:
error: value of optional type 'X?' must be unwrapped to refer to member 'f' of wrapped base type 'X'
let _: Int = x.f()
^
note: chain the optional using '?' to access member 'f' only for non-'nil' base values
let _: Int = x.f()
^
?
note: force-unwrap using '!' to abort execution if the optional value contains 'nil'
let _: Int = x.f()
^
!
Before this, we would sometimes get a Fix-It for just ‘?’ and sometimes get a Fix-It for the
coalescing ‘??’, neither of which is likely to be right.
More work on rdar://problem/42081852.
Improve diagnostics when referencing a member of an optional base, where the
Optional type does not have the member but the wrapped type does. Specifically,
suggest both the chaining ‘?’ and the force-unwrapping ‘!’ Fix-Its via explanatory
notes, e.g.:
error: value of optional type '[Int]?' must be unwrapped to refer to member 'subscript' of wrapped base type '[Int]'
return foo.array[0]
^
note: chain the optional using '?' to access member 'subscript' only for non-'nil' base values
return foo.array[0]
^
?
note: force-unwrap using '!' to abort execution if the optional value contains 'nil'
return foo.array[0]
^
!
More of rdar://problem/42081852.
When we determine that an optional value needs to be unwrapped to make
an expression type check, use notes to provide several different
Fix-It options (with descriptions) rather than always pushing users
toward '!'. Specifically, the errors + Fix-Its now looks like this:
error: value of optional type 'X?' must be unwrapped to a value of
type 'X'
f(x)
^
note: coalesce using '??' to provide a default when the optional
value contains 'nil'
f(x)
^
?? <#default value#>
note: force-unwrap using '!' to abort execution if the optional
value contains 'nil'
f(x)
^
!
Fixes rdar://problem/42081852.
Stop creating ImplicitlyUnwrappedOptional<T> so that we can remove it
from the type system.
Enable the code that generates disjunctions for Optional<T> and
rewrites expressions based on the original declared type being 'T!'.
Most of the changes supporting this were previously merged to master,
but some things were difficult to merge to master without actually
removing IUOs from the type system:
- Dynamic member lookup and dynamic subscripting
- Changes to ensure the bridging peephole still works
Past commits have attempted to retain as much fidelity with how we
were printing things as possible. There are some cases where we still
are not printing things the same way:
- In diagnostics we will print '?' rather than '!'
- Some SourceKit and Code Completion output where we print a Type
rather than Decl.
Things like module printing via swift-ide-test attempt to print '!'
any place that we now have Optional types that were declared as IUOs.
There are some diagnostics regressions related to the fact that we can
no longer "look through" IUOs. For the same reason some output and
functionality changes in Code Completion. I have an idea of how we can
restore these, and have opened a bug to investigate doing so.
There are some small source compatibility breaks that result from
this change:
- Results of dynamic lookup that are themselves declared IUO can in
rare circumstances be inferred differently. This shows up in
test/ClangImporter/objc_parse.swift, where we have
var optStr = obj.nsstringProperty
Rather than inferring optStr to be 'String!?', we now infer this to
be 'String??', which is in line with the expectations of SE-0054.
The fact that we were only inferring the outermost IUO to be an
Optional in Swift 4 was a result of the incomplete implementation of
SE-0054 as opposed to a particular design. This should rarely cause
problems since in the common-case of actually using the property rather
than just assigning it to a value with inferred type, we will behave
the same way.
- Overloading functions with inout parameters strictly by a difference
in optionality (i.e. Optional<T> vs. ImplicitlyUnwrappedOptional<T>)
will result in an error rather than the diagnostic that was added
in Swift 4.1.
- Any place where '!' was being used where it wasn't supposed to be
allowed by SE-0054 will now treat the '!' as if it were '?'.
Swift 4.1 generates warnings for these saying that putting '!'
in that location is deprecated. These locations include for example
typealiases or any place where '!' is nested in another type like
`Int!?` or `[Int!]`.
This commit effectively means ImplicitlyUnwrappedOptional<T> is no
longer part of the type system, although I haven't actually removed
all of the code dealing with it yet.
ImplicitlyUnwrappedOptional<T> is is dead, long live implicitly
unwrapped Optional<T>!
Resolves rdar://problem/33272674.
Currently some contextual errors are discovered too late
which leads to diagnostics of unrelated problems like argument
mismatches, these changes attempt to improve the situation
and try to diagnose contextual errors related to calls
before everything else.
Resolves: SR-5045, rdar://problem/32934129
This flips the switch to have @noescape be the default semantics for
function types in argument positions, for everything except property
setters. Property setters are naturally escaping, so they keep their
escaping-by-default behavior.
Adds contentual printing, and updates the test cases.
There is some further (non-source-breaking) work to be done for
SE-0103:
- We need the withoutActuallyEscaping function
- Improve diagnostics and QoI to at least @noescape's standards
- Deprecate / drop @noescape, right now we allow it
- Update internal code completion printing to be contextual
- Add more tests to explore tricky corner cases
- Small regressions in fixits in attr/attr_availability.swift
This removes conformance of DarwinBool and ObjCBool to the Boolean protocol,
and makes the &&/||/! operators be concrete w.r.t. Bool instead of abstract
on Boolean.
This fixes some outstanding bugs w.r.t diagnostics, but exposes some cases
where an existing diagnostic is not great. I'll fix that in a later patch
(tracked by rdar://27391581).
In member ref expressions, if the base is optional, and the expected
expression result is either optional or unknown, suggest a fixit that
makes it into an optional chain expr rather than force unwrapping.
Since in many cases the actual fixit is emitted during diagnosis, and
thus, while type checking sub exprs with no contextual type specified
(so nothing to check for preferring optionality), we also need an
additional flag to pass down from FailureDiagnosis for whether we
prefer to fix as force unwrapping or optional chaining.
I attempted to do this same job via providing a convert type but
setting the ConvertTypeIsOnlyAHint flag on the type checker, but
unfortunately there are a lot of other moving parts that look at that
type, even if it is only supposed to be a hint, so an additional flag
to the CS ended up being cleaner.
Basic implementatation of SE-0021, naming functions with argument
labels. Handle parsing of compound function names in various
unqualified-identifier productions, updating the AST representation of
various expressions from Identifiers to DeclNames. The result doesn't
capture all of the source locations we want; more on that later.
As part of this, remove the parsing code for the "selector-style"
method names, since we now have a replacement. The feature was never
publicized and doesn't make sense in Swift, so zap it outright.
and probably others.
When we're type-checking a failed ApplyExpr that has an overload set that
prevents getting a specific type to feed into the initial typechecking of
the argument list, ranking can often narrow down the list of candidates
further, to the point where there is only one candidate left or where all
candidates agree that one argument is wrong.
In this case, re-type-check the subexpr with the expected type. In the case of
rdar://problem/22243469 we now produce:
t.swift:6:11: error: invalid conversion from throwing function of type '() throws -> ()' to non-throwing function type '() -> Void'
process {
^
instead of:
t.swift:6:3: error: cannot invoke 'process' with an argument list of type '(() throws -> ())'
process {
^
t.swift:6:3: note: overloads for 'process' exist with these partially matching parameter lists: (UInt, fn: () -> Void)
process {
^
Which is a heck of a lot less specific. Similarly, in the testcase from rdar://23550816, instead
of producing:
takeTwoFuncsWithDefaults { $0 + 1 }
error: cannot invoke 'takeTwoFuncsWithDefaults' with an argument list of type '((Int -> Int)?)'
note: expected an argument list of type '(f1: (Int -> Int)?, f2: (String -> String)?)'
we now produce:
error: cannot convert value of type '_ -> Int' to expected argument type '(String -> String)?'
which is a lot closer to what we want to complain about.
fixit hint in CSDiags instead of being a FixKind. This resolves a number of issues with
it, particularly that it didn't actually check to see if the function in question takes
a () argument or not.
This fixes:
<rdar://problem/21692808> QoI: Incorrect 'add ()' fixit with trailing closure
among other issues.
Swift SVN r31728
<rdar://problem/18397777> QoI: special case comparisons with nil
<rdar://problem/18042123> QoI: Fixit for "if !optional" should suggest "if optional == nil"
Swift SVN r31204
- Have DiagnosticEngine produce "aka" annotations for sugared types.
- Fix the "optional type '@lvalue C?' cannot be used as a boolean; test for '!= nil' instead"
diagnostic to stop printing @lvalue noise.
This addresses:
<rdar://problem/19036351> QoI: Print minimally-desugared 'aka' types like Clang does
Swift SVN r30587
Now for:
let req = NSURLRequest(URL: NSURL(string: "<some url>")!)?
instead of producing:
test.swift:2:58: error: could not find an overload for 'init' that accepts the supplied
we produce the correct diagnostic, with a fixit:
error: cannot use optional chaining on non-optional value of type 'NSURLRequest'
let req = NSURLRequest(URL: NSURL(string: "<some url>")!)?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^
This also consolidates some existing diagnostics to improve their wording.
Swift SVN r30049
We were using getRValueType() and getRValueObjectType() when
setting up the constraint, but getRValueType() when simplifying
it. This led to a crash if the type was a single-argument tuple
with a named argument.
Swift SVN r29376
optional evaluation context that produced the optional.
<rdar://problem/20377684> Oscillating fixit for optional chain calling method that returns non-optional
Swift SVN r28212
necessary. Wrap forced optional fixit in parens if necessary.
<rdar://problem/20029786> Swift compiler sometimes suggests changing "as!" to "as?!"
Swift SVN r26189
