This required a few changes in places where we synthesize functions to
make sure these properties hold. That's good because we don't know where
we might already be depending on them. (On the other hand, we could also
decide not to care about TuplePattern labels, in which case I wonder if
we could eventually discard them altogether in functions.)
Still untested: that the function type is also in sync.
We need to be able to introduce and eliminate existentials inside
reabstraction thunks, so make this logic independent of RValue
and Expr emission.
NFC for now.
Swift SVN r31375
Requiring a variadic parameter to come at the end of the parameter
list is an old restriction that makes no sense nowadays, and which we
had all thought we had already lifted. It made variadic parameters
unusable with trailing closures or defaulted arguments, and made our
new print() design unimplementable.
Remove this restriction, replacing it with a less onerous and slightly
less silly restriction that we not have more than one variadic
parameter in a given parameter clause. Fixes rdar://problem/20127197.
Swift SVN r30542
To support this, make 'try' and 'try!' no longer IdentityExprs
and give them a common base class to simplify the sorts of
analyses and transformations that do want to treat them
as identity-like.
Note that getSPE() still looks through normal 'try', since
the overwhelming proportion of clients will consider it
semantically equivalent to the undecorated expression.
Change getValueProvidingExpr() to look through try!, since
it's allowed to return something with slightly different
semantics, and use it in the unused-result diagnostic.
Fixes a large number of bugs, mostly uncaught, with SILGen
peepholes that use getSPE() and therefore were accidentally
looking through try!. <rdar://21515402>
Swift SVN r30224
Specifically track when we're resolving type witnesses for a given
conformance, and refuse to recursively attempt to resolve those type
witnesses. The standard library patch in rdar://problem/21789238
triggers this, and isolating it in a small test case has proven
illusive.
Swift SVN r30160
Bogus nested types of archetypes in the AST were resulting in problems
for generic specialization in SIL, captured by
rdar://problem/19907135. Add AST-level verification to catch such
problems, which should have been fixed by the recent work to deal with
substitutions into concrete types of potential archetypes.
Swift SVN r29984
The isDependentType() query is woefully misunderstood. Some places
seem to want it to mean "a generic type parameter of dependent member
type", which corresponds to what is effectively a type parameter in
the language, while others want it to mean "contains a type parameter
anywhere in the type". Tease out these two meanings in
isTypeParameter() and hasTypeParameter(), respectively, and sort out
the callers.
Swift SVN r29945
- Fix a diagnostic to not include redundant ''s around a type name.
- Rework CleanupIllFormedExpression to be simpler and to not
unconditionally destroy data when it doesn't. This makes a code
completion test a bit more precise.
- Completely revamp getTypeOfIndependentSubExpression, to return the
subexpression produced by type checking instead of just a type. This
is important for cases when type checking changes the root of the AST
(e.g. resolving an unresolved_dot_expr) and allows us to eliminate
grungy and unsafe recovery code that was in place to work around this.
The last point makes the examples in Constraints/lvalues.swift better (giving
a somewhat generic error instead of an specific-but-incorrect error that 'z'
is immutable), but more importantly, it fixes a class of crashers like
<rdar://problem/21369926> Malformed Swift Enums crash playground service
where we'd end up with a LiteralExpr typed as Int instead of a Builtin integer
type of some sort.
Swift SVN r29932
initializer has been type-checked, rather than a bit for the entire
PatternBindingDecl.
<rdar://problem/21057425> Crash while compiling attached test-app.
Swift SVN r29049
instead of being an expression.
To the user, this has a couple of behavior changes, stemming from its non-expression-likeness.
- #available cannot be parenthesized anymore
- #available is in its own clause, not used in a 'where' clause of if/let.
Also, the implementation in the compiler is simpler and fits the model better. This
fixes:
<rdar://problem/20904820> Following a "let" condition with #available is incorrectly rejected
Swift SVN r28521
Verify that this bit is set during type-checking on
every ApplyExpr, and fix the remaining locations where
we weren't doing coverage testing on expressions; most
of these were harmless, but it's better to be safe.
Swift SVN r28509
Modules occupy a weird space in the AST now: they can be treated like
types (Swift.Int), which is captured by ModuleType. They can be
treated like values for disambiguation (Swift.print), which is
captured by ModuleExpr. And we jump through hoops in various places to
store "either a module or a decl".
Start cleaning this up by transforming Module into ModuleDecl, a
TypeDecl that's implicitly created to describe a module. Subsequent
changes will start folding away the special cases (ModuleExpr ->
DeclRefExpr, name lookup results stop having a separate Module case,
etc.).
Note that the Module -> ModuleDecl typedef is there to limit the
changes needed. Much of this patch is actually dealing with the fact
that Module used to have Ctx and Name public members that now need to
be accessed via getASTContext() and getName(), respectively.
Swift SVN r28284
The culprit happened to be a type representation cloner for tuple type
representations that didn't actually clone anything. Introduce an
AST-level verifier that makes sure we catch any archetypes that slip
into interface types earlier in the future.
Fixes rdar://problem/18796397 and the three dupes I've found so far.
Swift SVN r28080
Printing a module as Objective-C turns out to be a fantastic way to
verify the (de-)serialization of foreign error conventions, so
collapse the parsing-driving Objective-C printing test of throwing
methods into the general test for methods.
Swift SVN r27880
Printing a module as Objective-C turns out to be a fantastic way to
verify the (de-)serialization of foreign error conventions, so
collapse the parsing-driving Objective-C printing test of throwing
methods into the general test for methods.
Swift SVN r27870
a list of their elements, instead of abusing TupleExpr/ParenExpr
to hold them.
This is a more correct representation of what is going on in the
code and produces slightly better diagnostics in obscure cases.
However, the real reason to fix this is that the ParenExpr's that
were being formed were not being installed into the "semantic"
view of the collection expr, not getting type checked correctly,
and led to nonsensical ParenExprs. These non-sensical ParenExprs
blocked turning on AST verification of other ones.
With this fixed, we can finally add AST verification that
IdentityExpr's have sensible types.
Swift SVN r27850
This fixes <rdar://problem/20494437> SILGen crash handling default arguments
again, and includes a fix for MiscDiagnostics to look through the generated
TupleShuffleExprs in @noescape processing (which tripped up XCTest).
This fixes <rdar://problem/16860940> QoI: Strict keyword arguments loses type sugar in calls
where we'd lose some type sugar.
This fixes sanity in the ASTs: ScalarToTupleExpr now always has consistent
types between its argument and result, so we can turn on AST Verification of it.
Swift SVN r27827
Move the map that keeps track of conforming decl -> requirement from ASTContext
to a nominal type's ConformanceLookupTable, and populate it lazily.
This allows getSatisfiedProtocolRequirements() to work with declarations from module files.
Test on the SourceKit side.
Part of rdar://20526240.
Swift SVN r27353
Consistently open all references into existentials into
opened-existential archetypes within the constraint solver. Then,
during constraint application, use OpenExistentialExprs to record in
the AST where an existential is opened into an archetype, then use
that archetype throughout the subexpression. This simplifies the
overall representation, since we don't end up with a mix of operations
on existentials and operations on archetypes; it's all archetypes,
which tend to have better support down the line in SILGen already.
Start simplifying the code in SILGen by taking away the existential
paths that are no longer needed. I suspect there are more
simplifications to be had here.
The rules for placing OpenExistentialExprs are still a bit ad hoc;
this will get cleaned up later so that we can centralize that
information. Indeed, the one regression in the compiler-crasher suite
is because we're not closing out an open existential along an error
path.
Swift SVN r27230
Place OpenExistentialExprs for references to lvalue subscripts or properties
(in protocol extensions) via existentials just outside of the member
or subscript reference, rather than far outside the expression. This
gives us a tighter bound on the open-existential expressions without
introducing the post-pass I was threatening.
OpenExistentialExprs just outside of lvalue member/subscript are
themselves lvalues. Resurrect John's OpenOpaqueExistentialComponent to
handle the opening of a (materialized) existential lvalues as an
lvalue path component. This has the nice effect of codifying the
formal access rules for opened existentials as well as handling inout
on opened existentials appropriately.
Big thanks to John for talking through the model with me and leaving
dead code around for me to use.
Swift SVN r27105
Previously some parts of the compiler referred to them as "fields",
and most referred to them as "elements". Use the more generic 'elements'
nomenclature because that's what we refer to other things in the compiler
(e.g. the elements of a bracestmt).
At the same time, make the API better by providing "getElement" consistently
and using it, instead of getElements()[i].
NFC.
Swift SVN r26894
Currently a no-op, but effective access for entities within the current
module will soon need to take testability into account. This declaration:
internal func foo() {}
has a formal access of 'internal', but an effective access of 'public' if
we're in a testable mode.
Part of rdar://problem/17732115 (testability)
Swift SVN r26472
Allows us to distinguish between "we know this conformance exists" and
"we're doing a detailed check of this conformance". Use it, rather
than membership in the nebulous ASTContext-wide caching structure
"ConformsTo", to detect recursive attempts to complete a conformance.
Swift SVN r26248
Previously, a multi-pattern var/let decl like:
var x = 4, y = 17
would produce two pattern binding decls (one for x=4 one for y=17). This is convenient
in some ways, but is bad for source reproducibility from the ASTs (see, e.g. the improvements
in test/IDE/structure.swift and test/decl/inherit/initializer.swift).
The hardest part of this change was to get parseDeclVar to set up the AST in a way
compatible with our existing assumptions. I ended up with an approach that forms PBDs in
more erroneous cases than before. One downside of this is that we now produce a spurious
"type annotation missing in pattern"
diagnostic in some cases. I'll take care of that in a follow-on patch.
Swift SVN r26224
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
When we check a protocol conformance, we recurse to check the implied
protocol conformances for inherited protocols first. When doing so, we
were passing down the current DeclContext, which would force the
creation of a new conformance to that protocol within that
DeclContext. This isn't what we want: we want to find or create the
conformance in whichever context it naturally belongs.
This is a partial step toward solving the problem, which eliminates
the duplicate witness tables from the example in
rdar://problem/18182969. However, we're still not using the
conformance lookup table to decide where the witness tables/protocol
conformances go, which means the actual declaration context for a
witness table is still a bit ad hoc.
Baby steps.
Swift SVN r26129
