code had the effect of squishing the note that printed the overload candidate
set for the operators in question. While these are not generally helpful given
how many overloads we have of (e.g.) the + operator, it doesn't do us any good
to have special cases like this, because methods can have tons of overloads as
well.
call expression onto a callee when it was a binary expression. Doing this
requires improving the diagnostics for when the contextual result type is
incompatible with all candidates, but that is general goodness all around.
This fixes:
<rdar://problem/22333090> QoI: Propagate contextual information in a call to operands
and improves a number of diagnostics where the problem is that an operator
is used in a context that expects a type that it cannot produce.
Swift SVN r31891
- Enhance the branch new argument label overload diagnostic to just
print the argument labels that are the problem, instead of printing
the types inferred at the argument context. This can lead to confusion
particularly when an argument label is missing. For example before:
error: argument labels '(Int)' do not match any available overloads
note: overloads for 'TestOverloadSets.init' exist with these partially matching parameter lists: (a: Z0), (value: Int), (value: Double)
after:
error: argument labels '(_:)' do not match any available overloads
note: overloads for 'TestOverloadSets.init' exist with these partially matching parameter lists: (a: Z0), (value: Int), (value: Double)
Second, fix <rdar://problem/22451001> QoI: incorrect diagnostic when argument to print has the wrong type
by specifically diagnosing the problem when you pass in an argument to a nullary function. Before:
error: cannot convert value of type 'Int' to expected argument type '()'
after:
error: argument passed to call that takes no arguments
print(r22451001(5))
^
Swift SVN r31795
forced conversion to "_ -> T" if it will refine the type otherwise found by
doing a non-contextual type check. This allows us to diagnose calls to
non-function values with more specificity, e.g. adding another case were we
recommend "do" when using bare braces.
Swift SVN r31726
This includes a few changes:
- Enhance diagnoseGeneralConversionFailure to not ignore constraints that are fully solved by
CSDiags' heuristics.
- Enhance dictionary/array literals diagnostics to handle non-compliance to their literal
protocols with a specific and custom error message.
- Add specific QoI for turning accidental use of array literals in dictionary context into
the right dictionary syntax (with a fixit).
Swift SVN r31696
use that contextual type to guide typechecking of the callee. This allows us to
propagate that type through generic constraints effectively, making us produce
much more useful diagnostics within closures taking methods like "map" (for
example).
This fixes:
<rdar://problem/20491794> QoI closures: Error message does not tell me what the problem is
Specifically, running the testcase:
enum Color { case Unknown(description: String) }
let xs: (Int, Color) = [1,2].map({ ($0, .Unknown("")) })
produces: error: cannot convert call result type '[_]' to expected type '(Int, Color)'
Changing that to:
let xs: [(Int, Color)] = [1,2].map({ ($0, .Unknown("")) })
produces: error: missing argument label 'description:' in call
... with a fixit to introduce the label.
This also fixes most of 22333090, but we're only using this machinery for CallExprs
so far, not for operators yet.
Swift SVN r31484
automatically pass down TypeCheckExprFlags::AllowUnresolvedTypeVariables
IFF we have no contextual type. This gives us UnresolvedTypes in more cases,
which improves diagnostics in various situations, and also simplifies
CSDiag. The change to misc_diagnostics.swift is a particularly nice progression.
Swift SVN r31406
Now we can propagate contextual types through collection literals even when they are generic, producing
specific diagnostics for elements within them.
Swift SVN r31327
When diagnosing failure to typecheck a binary '~=' expression that was
synthesized when typechecking an expression pattern, offer a message
that describes the failure more helpfully.
<rdar://problem/21995744> QoI: Binary operator '~=' cannot be applied to operands of type 'String' and 'String?'
Swift SVN r31286
argument. For now we start with some of the most simple cases: single argument
calls. This dramatically improves the QoI for error messages in argument lists,
typically turning a error+note combo into a single specific error message.
Some minor improvements coming (and also generalizing this to n-ary calls), but it
is nice that all the infrastructure is starting to come together...
Swift SVN r30905
which we have a contextual type that was the failure reason. These are a bit
longer but also more explicit than the previous diagnostics.
Swift SVN r30669
- Improve handling of if_expr in a couple of ways: teach constraint simplification
about IfThen/IfElse and teach CSDiags about the case when the cond expr doesn't match
BooleanType. This is rarely necessary, but CSDiags is all about cornercases, and this
does fix a problem in a testcase.
- Be a bit more specific about the constraint failure kind (e.g. say subtype) and when
we have a protocol conformance failure, emit a specific diagnostic about it, instead of
just saying that the types aren't convertible.
Swift SVN r30650
detailed analysis of callees, which give us overload sets in more cases,
producing notes more consistently, and producing much better diagnostics
for the curried cases in test/Constraints/diagnostics.swift.
This also allows us to eliminate getCalleeName, which simplifies things
in CSDiags.
Swift SVN r30491
we can start taking advantage of ambiguously typed subexpressions in CSDiags. We
start by validating the callee function of ApplyExprs, which substantially improves
our abilities to generate precise diagnostics about malformed calls.
This is the minimal introduction of this concept to CSDiags, a lot of refactoring
is yet to come, however, this is enough to resolve:
<rdar://problem/21080030> Bad diagnostic for invalid method call in boolean expression
<rdar://problem/21784170> Incongruous `unexpected trailing closure` error in `init` function which is cast and called without trailing closure.
one of the testcases from:
<rdar://problem/20789423> Unclear diagnostic for multi-statement closure with no return type
and a bunch of other places where we got weird "unexpected trailing closure"
diagnostics that made no sense. As usual, it is two steps forward and one step back,
as this exposed some other weird latent issues like:
<rdar://problem/21900971> QoI: Bogus conversion error in generics case
Swift SVN r30429
argument list for a CallExpr instead of matching a gang of typevartypes against them.
This allows us to produce better matches in some cases.
Swift SVN r30065
facilities used by operators etc. This required a bunch of changes to make
the diagnostics changes strictly an improvement:
- Teach the new path about calls to TypeExprs.
- Teach evaluateCloseness some simple things about varargs.
- Make the generic diagnosis logic produce a better error when there is
exactly one match.
Overall, the resultant diagnostics are a step forward: we now produce candidate
set notes more uniformly, and the messages about some existing ones are
more specific. This is just another stepping stone towards progress though.
Swift SVN r30057
... by reimplementing the DiscardAssignmentExpr checker in MiscDiagnostics
instead of being in CSApply (which gets run on partial expression ASTs).
Also, when type checking and salvaging an expression fails, do not generate
structural diagnostics in addition to the type checker diagnostics, they are
just noise.
Swift SVN r29937
ExtensibleCollectionType's operations can all be represented by the
primitive range replacement operation, so fold it into
RangeReplaceableCollectionType.
In addition, provide default implementations of
RangeReplaceableCollectionType's methods.
- New tests added for combinations of (static, generic) calls and
(default, custom) implementations.
- Mark free Swift functions as unavailable with a message to direct the
developer to the protocol methods.
- Mark ExtensibleCollectionType as available with a message added to
direct the developer to the right protocol.
rdar://problem/18220295
Swift SVN r29857
them with diagnoseGeneralFailure() which would miss out on the common cases
where the subexpr of the ParenExpr is the issue.
For example, before we would produce:
t.swift:8:8: error: could not find an overload for '&' that accepts the supplied arguments
if !(x & 4.0) {}
~~~^~~~~~
now we produce:
t.swift:8:6: error: binary operator '&' cannot be applied to operands of type 'Int' and 'Double'
if !(x & 4.0) {}
^
t.swift:8:6: note: overloads for '&' exist with these partially matching parameter lists: (Int, Int)
if !(x & 4.0) {}
^
also, remove some special handling for lvalues and inout from overload
diagnostics, which can't matter anymore.
Swift SVN r29661
by propagating the 'is return expr' bit more carefully in sequence folding, and by
adding another path for handling the return diagnostics better.
This probably improves a number of cases where we complain about "this argument list
is invalid" when the call is in the context of a return.
Swift SVN r29565
failed so the verifier knows to walk it instead of SubExpr.
<rdar://problem/20770032> Pattern matching ranges against tuples crashes the compiler
Swift SVN r29525
lvalues when compiling list of partial-match overloads in diagnosis.
(This is a reapplication of commits r29462 and r29469.)
Also, fix the following tests:
stdlib/FixedPointDiagnostics.swift.gyb
stdlib/NumericDiagnostics.swift.gyb
<rdar://problem/17875634> can't append to array of tuples
Swift SVN r29493
This reverts commit r29462 because it looks like it breaks the following
tests:
Swift :: stdlib/FixedPointDiagnostics.swift.gyb
Swift :: stdlib/NumericDiagnostics.swift.gyb
Swift SVN r29484
Emitting an error message about a pattern the user didn't write isn't awesome,
complain about the type requirements of an if/let binding specifically.
Swift SVN r28119
includes a number of QoI things to help people write the correct code. I will commit
the testcase for it as the next patch.
The bulk of this patch is moving the stdlib, testsuite and validation testsuite to
the new syntax. I moved a few uses of "as" patterns back to as? expressions in the
stdlib as well.
Swift SVN r27959
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
- 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
