We can end up with a rule that has a protocol symbol on the right hand side:
X.Y.Z => X.W.[P]
This will occur if X.W.[P] was obtained by simplifying a term X.W.U.V via
a rule (U.V => [P]), and before completion discovers a rule
(X.W.[P] => X.W).
Fixes rdar://problem/94854326, rdar://problem/94980084.
A conformance requirement on a concrete type parameter is redundant if the
concrete type conforms to the protocol.
The replacement path for the conformance rule is based on a concrete
conformance rule introduced by the property map. Since the concrete
conformance rule is not associated with a requirement ID, this would
normally muffle the redundancy warning, because we don't want to
suggest removing a rule that depends on a non-redundant, non-explicit
rule.
However, concrete conformance rules don't actually appear in the
minimal signature, so skip them when computing the set of non-redundant,
non-explicit rules to ensure that the original conformance requirement
is still diagnosed as redundant.
Every protocol gets an 'identity conformance' rule [P].[P] => [P].
A trivially-stated circularity is always redundant because of this
rule, and we diagnose circular inheritance elsewhere as a hard
error, so just add a special case to skip adding such a rule here
to avoid the useless warning on top of the existing error.
computing a concrete same-type or superclass for conflict diagnostics.
Otherwise, diagnostics will show fresh type parameters when the concrete
type is generic.
Property map construction is still not incremental, and considers
all rules. Skipping subst-simplified rules here violates invariants
checked by the next commit.
For efficiency I want to keep replacement paths for redundant rules
unsubstituted, so that earlier replacement paths can reference
redundant rules that appear later in the RedundantRules array.
Right now we expand replacement paths so that their RewriteSteps
only mention non-redundant rules.
This patch refactors the computeRedundantRequirementDiagnostics()
method a bit:
The impliedRequirements set is now named nonExplicitNonRedundantRules,
and in addition to storing these rules themselves, the set also
stores any _redundant_ rules that reference these rules via their
replacement paths.
Since this is computing a transitive closure, we walk the
RedundantRules array in reverse. A replacement path can only
reference a redundant rule if that redundant rule appears later
in the array.
Preserves concrete type rules on associated types that were derived
from rules indirectly formed from protocol typealias rules.
That is, if you have a pair of rules in another minimization domain:
[P].A.[concrete: C] => [P].A
[Q:T].[P] => [Q:T]
Then completion will introduce a new rule:
[Q:T].A.[concrete: C] => [Q:T].A
Since this rule is outside of our minimization domain, we don't record
a rewrite loop for it, and it will never become redundant.
Now if we have a rule in our own minimization domain:
T.[Q:T].A => T.[Q:U]
Then we get a new rule:
T.[Q:U].[concrete: C] => T.[Q:U]
Make sure we keep this rule around on account of it being derived from
([Q:T].A.[concrete: C] => [Q:T].A).
initialization of the rewrite system.
Instead, the rewrite system can determine trivially redundant requirements
by finding structural requirements with no associated rewrite rules.
rule has a non-explicit, non-redundant rule in its rewrite path.
This fixes bogus redundancy diagnostics in cases where the canonical form
of a redundant rule is not explicit in source, e.g.
protocol Swappable2 {
associatedtype A
associatedtype B
associatedtype Swapped : Swappable2
where Swapped.B == A,
Swapped.Swapped == Self
}
in the above case, the canonical rule for `Swapped.B == A` is the rule
[Swappable2:Swapped].[Swappable2:A] => [Swappable2:B], which is not
explicit.
rules in a separate pass after homotopy reduction.
RewriteSystem::propagateExplicitBits was too eager in propagating
IDs from explicit rules within rewrite loops, which resulted in bogus
redundancy warnings when the canonical form of an explicit rule was
given a different requirement ID. Instead, propagate requirement IDs
after homotopy reduction when redundant rules are computed and rewrite
loops are simplified.
rewrite system.
This ID can be used to index into the WrittenRequirements array in the
rewrite system to retrieve the structural requirement, e.g. for the
purpose of diagnostics.
These rules would be fine since RHS simplification eliminates them,
but they cause problems for the minimal conformances algorithm.
To avoid introducing such rules, ensure that the critical pair of
two property-like rules is itself a property-like rule instead of
relying on subsequent simplifications sorting it out. See the
new comment in RewriteSystem::computeCriticalPair() for details.
I need to understand this problem better and either fix minimal
conformances or add stronger assertions, but for now this fixes
the last failure with -requirement-machine-abstract-signatures=verify.
Consider this example:
protocol P : C {}
class C : P {}
<T where T : P>
The GenericSignatureBuilder thinks the minimized signature is
<T where T : P>. The RequirementMachine would minimize it down to
<T where T : C>. The latter is more correct, since the conformance
here is concrete and no witness table needs to be passed in at
runtime, however for strict binary compatibility we need to produce
the same signature as the GenericSignatureBuilder.
Accomplish this by changing the minimal conformances algorithm to
detect "circular concrete conformance rules", which take the form
[P].[concrete: C : Q]
Where Q : P. These rules are given special handling. Ordinarily a
protocol conformance rule is eliminated before a concrete conformance
rule; however concrete conformances derived from circular
conformances are considered to be redundant from the get-go,
preventing protocol conformances that can be written in terms of
such concrete conformances from themselves becoming redundant.
Fixes rdar://problem/89633532.
There are two kinds of protocol typealiases:
1) The underlying type is a type parameter. These rules look like
[P].A => X where X is the underlying type.
2) The underlying type is a concrete type. These rules look like
[P].A.[concrete: C] => [P].A.
The isProtocolTypeAliasRule() predicate detects both cases and
returns the type alias name ('A', in the above examples). For now
it's not used anywhere, since we don't actually introduce these
rules for any reason.
