Until the issue is fixed. Tracked by:
<rdar://problem/49791522> Swift CI Test failures: IRGen/autorelease_optimized_armv7/aarch64.
https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-10474
Along with updating tests to adopt the new storage class names, the behavior of removeAll() has changed slightly.
If t stored an empty Set/Dictionary that was bridged from Objective-C, t.removeAlI() used to keep the original Objective-C storage intact. Now removeAll() replaces the old storage with the empty singleton, which makes a lot more sense to me.
SwiftPrivate/PRNG.swift:
- currently uses `theGlobalMT19937`;
- previously used `arc4random` (see #1939);
- is obsoleted by SE-0202: Random Unification.
When Set/Dictionary is nested in another Set, the boundaries of the nested collections weren’t correctly delineated in commutative hashing.
For example, these Sets all hashed the same:
[[1, 2], [3, 4]]
[[1, 3], [2, 4]]
[[1, 4], [2, 3]]
Hash collisions could thus be systematically generated.
To fix this, remove collection-level support for one-shot hashing and revert to the previous method of generating hash values. (Set is still able to support one-shot hashing for its members, though.)
NSString has a stricter concept of equality than Swift’s String, so it is possible to construct NSDictionary/NSSet instances that contain duplicate keys according to Swift’s definition of string equality. This change improves how we handle these cases by coalescing the duplicate keys (keeping a single value).
rdar://problem/35995647
* Eradicate IndexDistance associated type, replacing with Int everywhere
* Consistently use Int for ExistentialCollection’s IndexDistance type.
* Fix test for IndexDistance removal
* Remove a handful of no-longer-needed explicit types
* Add compatibility shims for non-Int index distances
* Test compatibility shim
* Move IndexDistance typealias into the Collection protocol
Using && here causes us to go down a SILGen path that guarantees that self will
be evaluated over the entire && expression instead of just the LHS. This cause
the uniqueness check to always return false at -Onone. At -O, the optimizer is
smart enough to remove this issue.
rdar://33358110
Consider different overload choices for the same location in evaluation
order, this makes overload resolution more predictable because it's going
to follow expression bottom-up, that prevents situations when some
expressions are considered ambigious because choices taken further up
equate the score, instead each level is given distinct weight
based on evaluation order.
Resolves: rdar://problem/31888810
