Continue to emit notes for the candidates, but use different text.
Note that we can emit a typo correction fix-it even if there are
multiple candidates with the same name.
Also, disable typo correction in the migrator, since the operation
is quite expensive, the notes are never presented to the user, and
the fix-its can interfere with the migrator's own edits.
Our general guidance is that fix-its should be added on the main
diagnostic only when the fix-it is highly likely to be correct.
The exact threshold is debateable. Typo correction is certainly
capable of making mistakes, but most of its edits are right, and
when it's wrong it's usually obviously wrong. On balance, I think
this is the right thing to do. For what it's worth, it's also
what we do in Clang.
* Make Range conditionally a Collection
* Convert ClosedRange to conditionally a collection
* De-gyb Range/ClosedRange, refactoring some methods.
* Remove use of Countable{Closed}Range from stdlib
* Remove Countable use from Foundation
* Fix test errors and warnings resulting from Range/CountableRange collapse
* fix prespecialize test for new mangling
* Update CoreAudio use of CountableRange
* Update SwiftSyntax use of CountableRange
* Restore ClosedRange.Index: Hashable conformance
* Move fixed typechecker slowness test for array-of-ranges from slow to fast, yay
* Apply Doug's patch to loosen test to just check for error
This reverts commit dc24c2bd34.
Turns out Chris fixed the build but when I was looking at the bots, his fix had
not been tested yet, so I thought the tree was still red and was trying to
revert to green.
Generally speaking, it's necessary to typecheck all parts of a
statement regardless of whether earlier parts failed to typecheck. For
example, even if the condition of an if-statement fails to typecheck, we
should still check its branches. This way all expressions in the AST are
processed (i.e. SequenceExprs translated to trees) and we get more
diagnostics.
The big thing left to fix is for-each statement checking. If there are
any type errors in the pattern or sequence of a for-each statement, the
body doesn't get type-checked.
<rdar://problem/23684220>
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
Make the following patterns illegal:
if var x = ... {
...
}
guard var x = ... else {
...
}
while var x = ... {
...
}
And provide a replacement fixit 'var' -> 'let'.
rdar://problem/23172698
Swift SVN r32855
Don't allow a pattern like:
for var x in sequence {
...
}
and provide a removal fix-it for the 'var' keyword.
Additionally, for the following code:
for let x in sequence {
...
}
Provide a removal fix-it since the 'let' specifier is now
redundant.
rdar://problem/23172698
Swift SVN r32818
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
Mechanically add "Type" to the end of any protocol names that don't end
in "Type," "ible," or "able." Also, drop "Type" from the end of any
associated type names, except for those of the *LiteralConvertible
protocols.
There are obvious improvements to make in some of these names, which can
be handled with separate commits.
Fixes <rdar://problem/17165920> Protocols `Integer` etc should get
uglier names.
Swift SVN r19883
