This simplifies the representation and allows clients to handle fewer
cases. It also removes an ambiguity in the representation which could
lead us to have two canonical types for the same type.
This is definitely not working yet, but I'm not making progress on
it quickly enough to unblock what we need to unblock; it'll have to
be fixed in parallel.
Generic arguments types are not always resolved enough to enable
aggregated mismatch fixes, which means that the solver should be
able to handle standalone generic argument matching constraints
and create a fix per mismatch location to coalesce them during
diagnostics.
Resolves: rdar://106054263
`__shared` and `__owned` would always get mangled, even when they don't have any effect
on ABI, making it unnecessarily ABI-breaking to apply them to existing API to make
calling conventions explicit. Avoid this issue by only mangling them in cases where they
change the ABI from the default.
Currently, this is staged in as `_forget`,
as part of SE-390. It can only be used on
`self` for a move-only type within a consuming
method or accessor. There are other rules, see
Sema for the details.
A `forget self` really just consumes self and
performs memberwise destruction of its data.
Thus, the current expansion of this statement
just reuses what we inject into the end of a
deinit.
Parsing of `forget` is "contextual".
By contextual I mean that we do lookahead to
the next token and see if it's identifier-like.
If so, then we parse it as the `forget` statement.
Otherwise, we parse it as though "forget" is an
identifier as part of some expression.
This way, we won't introduce a source break for
people who wrote code that calls a forget
function.
This should make it seamless to change it from
`_forget` to `forget` in the future.
resolves rdar://105795731
Don't attempt the fix until sub-expression is resolved
if chain is not using leading-dot syntax. This is better
than attempting to propagate type information down
optional chain which is hard to diagnose.
Resolves: rdar://105348781
This means two things:
- transformed closures behave just like regular multi-statement closures
- It's now possible to pass partially resolved parameter types into
the closure which helps with diagnostics.
where `MO` is a move-only type.
turns out it was being allowed because the cast is represented as a
disjunction in the constraint solver:
- `MO conv AnyObject`
- `MO bridge conv AnyObject`
I caught the first one but missed the second, which was unconditionally
being allowed.
Since values of generic type are currently assumed to always
support copying, we need to prevent move-only types from
being substituted for generic type parameters.
This approach leans on a `_Copyable` marker protocol to which
all generic type parameters implicitly must conform.
A few other changes in this initial implementation:
- Now every concrete type that can conform to Copyable will do so. This fixes issues with conforming to a protocol that requires Copyable.
- Narrowly ban writing a concrete type `[T]` when `T` is move-only.
Introduce SingleValueStmtExpr, which allows the
embedding of a statement in an expression context.
This then allows us to parse and type-check `if`
and `switch` statements as expressions, gated
behind the `IfSwitchExpression` experimental
feature for now. In the future,
SingleValueStmtExpr could also be used for e.g
`do` expressions.
For now, only single expression branches are
supported for producing a value from an
`if`/`switch` expression, and each branch is
type-checked independently. A multi-statement
branch may only appear if it ends with a `throw`,
and it may not `break`, `continue`, or `return`.
The placement of `if`/`switch` expressions is also
currently limited by a syntactic use diagnostic.
Currently they're only allowed in bindings,
assignments, throws, and returns. But this could
be lifted in the future if desired.
associated failure diagnostic.
This constraint fix is unused now that MacroExpansionExpr always has an
argument list, and goes through the AddMissingArguments constraint fix for
this error.
Member chains with leading-dot syntax can infer the base type
only from context, so optionality mismatch with the contextual
type should propagate object type down the chain.
If base type of the leading-dot syntax expression has been determined
to be a placeholder, this could only mean that `.<name>` couldn't be
resolved in the current context.
Resolves: rdar://104302974
If a placeholder appears on one of the side of tuple element matching
conversion, consider that conversion to be solved, because the actual
error is related to the placeholder.
