This patch improves the error message emitted when the capture list
contains an item that is a sub-field of a struct/class/etc....
If the closure capture did not include `weak` at the beginning, the
presence of a period would cause the if-chain to fall through the
identifier checking, resulting in an error message about expecting a
`weak` keyword. Instead, I've opted to accept the period at that stage
of parsing so that we can fall through to a better error message.
For the following code
```
{ [self.field] in ... }
```
instead of emitting
`expected 'weak', 'unowned', or no specifier in capture list`,
we now emit
`fields may only be captured by assigning to a specific name`
with a fix-it that changes the code to
```
{ [ field = self.field ] in ... }
```
With `-enable-experimental-string-processing`,
start lexing `'` delimiters as regex literals (this
is just a placeholder delimiter for now). The
contents of which gets passed to the libswift
library, which can return an error string to be
emitted, or null for success.
The libswift side isn't yet hooked up to the Swift
regex parser, so for now just emit a dummy
diagnostic for regexes starting with quantifiers.
If successful, build an AST node which will be
emitted as an implicit call to an
`init(_regexString:)` initializer of an in-scope
`Regex` decl (which will eventually be a known
stdlib decl).
Now that the CSApply just uses components, we can
better split up the key path constructors to either
accept a set of resolved components, or a parsed
root or path.
Previously, when we reached the maximum nesting level, we changed the current token’s kind to an EOF token. A lot of places in the parser are not set up to expect this token change. The intended workaround was to check whether pushing a structure marker failed (which would change the token kind) and bail out parsing if this happened. This was fragile and caused assertion failures in assert builds.
Instead of changing the current token’s kind, and failing to push the structure marker, let the lexer know that it should cut off lexing, essentially making the input buffer stop at the current position. The parser will continue to consume its current token (`Parser.Tok`) and the next token that’s already lexed in the lexer (`Lexer.NextToken`) before reaching the emulated EOF token. Thus two more tokens are parsed than before, but that shouldn’t make much of a difference.
We used to avoid parsing labels for yield stmts
by passing in `SyntaxKind::YieldStmt` and relying
on this condition. However we no longer do so, we
pass `SyntaxKind::ExprList` instead.
Split up the expr list parsing members such that
there are separate entry points for tuple and
argument list parsing, and start using the argument
list parsing member for call and subscripts.
Completing a generic parameter to a nested type `Outer.Nested<#^COMPLETE^#>` crashed when used to initialize a local variable and returned no results when initializing a global variable.
This is because the generic argument parsing logic for nested types inside `parseExprPostfixSuffix` didn’t match that of global types in `parseExprIdentifier`. Make sure they do the same thing semantically.
Fixes rdar://77909679 [SR-14627]
This commit essentially consistes of the following steps:
- Add a new code completion key path component that represents the code completion token inside a key path. Previously, the key path would have an invalid component at the end if it contained a code completion token.
- When type checking the key path, model the code completion token’s result type by a new type variable that is unrelated to the previous components (because the code completion token might resolve to anything).
- Since the code completion token is now properly modelled in the constraint system, we can use the solver based code completion implementation and inspect any solution determined by the constraint solver. The base type for code completion is now the result type of the key path component that preceeds the code completion component.
This resolves bugs where code completion was not working correctly if the key path’s type had a generic base or result type. It’s also nice to have moved another completion type over to the solver-based implementation.
Resolves rdar://78779234 [SR-14685] and rdar://78779335 [SR-14703]
When completing `items.#^COMPLETE^# { $0.content }`, we are stopping parsing of the expression after the code completion token and are thus left with `{ $0.content }` in `parseDeclVar`, which interprets the `{` as the start of an accessor clause, wrapping the entire variable in an accessor decl and thus causing code completion to not show any results.
To avoid this issue, consume any postfix expressions after the code completion token and discard them. This assures that the trailing closure gets consumed before it can be interpreted as an accessor decl.
Fixes rdar://77259087 [SR-14544]
Parse a completion token as an empty parameter name (just like `_`) to
prevent the parser to parse it as an expression and offer completions
for it.
rdar://78798718
Due to https://github.com/apple/swift/pull/36552, parsing the code completion token as a type inside a generic parameter list no longer fails. Instead, it consumes the code completion token as a type identifier. However, since `parseExprIdentifer` does not return a `ParserStatus`, the information whether a code completion token was consumed gets lost, causing `setCodeCompletionDelayedDeclState` to not be called and thus no code completion results show up.
To resolve this, make `parseExprIdentifier` return its `ParserStatus` through a `ParserResult`.
Fixes rdar://76335452 [SR-14432]
When completing within an InOutExpr like `&foo.<complete>`, we were forming a
CodeCompletionExpr with a base when parsing the content of the InOutExpr and
storing it in CodeCompletionCallbacksImpl::CodeCompleteTokenExpr. When the
result of that parse contained a code completion though, we were dropping the
sub-expression completely and forming an empty code completion result in place
of the inout expression, which resulted in later code inserting a code
completion expression with no base into the AST. The solver based completion
was later asking for the type of the code completion and its base using the
expression stored in CodeCompletionCallbacksImpl::CodeCompleteTokenExpr, but
that never ended up in the AST so we hit an assertion about the expression not
have a type in the formed solutions.
Resolves rdar://75366814
For backtracking scopes that are never cancelled, we can completely disable the SyntaxParsingContext, avoiding the creation of deferred nodes which will never get recorded.
The way in which we detected an "async" in expression context broke
some well-formed code that used "async" as a variable. Narrow the
check to only cases where the code will be ill-formed with "async" as
an identifier.
Always parse `async` and `await`, allowing the definition and use of
asynchronous functions without the "experimental concurrency" flag.
Note that, at present, use of asynchronous functions requires one to
explicitly import or link against the `_Concurrency` library. We'll
sort this out in a follow-up change.
Tracked by rdar://73455330.
This is again a transitional state before SyntaxParsingContext hands
the responsibility over to SyntaxTreeCreator and from there to
SyntaxParseActions.
This is an intermediate state in which the lexer delegates the
responsibility for trivia lexing to the parser. Later, the parser will
delegate this responsibility to SyntaxParsingContext which will hand it
over to SyntaxParseAction, which will only lex the pieces if it is
really necessary to do so.
By replacing the 'async' with 'await' in the parser, we avoid the issue
of cascading errors as the compiler gets more and more confused by what
it's reading. Instead, everything mostly passes and we just emit the one
error message.
One caveat that I hadn't taken into account before was that we could
have a function called "async", in which case we don't want to replace
the "async" keyword with "await".
The `try await` ordering is both easier to read and indicates the order
of operations better, because the suspension point occurs first and
then one can observe a thrown error.
